- (1.)The present appeal has been preferred under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment dated 18 th June, 2007, passed by learned Special Judge, Mandi, (H.P.), in Sessions Trial No.22 of 2006, whereby learned Special Judge convicted the accused under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act') awarding sentence to convict-appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs.1 lac and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year.
(2.)The prosecution case is that a team of police officials comprising of Inspector Dabe Ram (PW-8), along with HC Krishan Lal, Lady Constable Bimla Devi and Constable Surjit Kumar at about 5 P.M. left for traffic checking duty on 12.3.2006 in vehicle No.HP-33-0365,when reached at Khalyut Mor on Kandha-Chail Chowk road and at about 6 P.M. observed a taxi No.HP-01-3696, coming in high speed from Kandha side on its way to Chail Chowk was stopped at some distance despite signal having been given by the police officials. A lady was found sitting on the back seat with a bag on her side. On asking by PW.8, the driver could not produce the driving licence as he was only holding a learners licence, as such, the vehicle was challaned under the Motor Vehicles Act vide challan Ext.PG and on enquiry the lady disclosed her name as Kamla Devi and she was informed about her checking. Thereafter, (PW-1), Sohan Lal, Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, was called by PW-8 and formal search of bag Ext.P-3 was carried out and poly bag Ext.P-4, containing Charas, was recovered from there. HC Kishan Chand arranged scale and weights from the shop of Narotam Ram, a Karyana Merchant at Naun and on weighment 5 Kilograms of Charas was recovered, out of which two samples of 25 grams each were taken out and sealed with seal 'K' and marked them as A-1 and A-2 and remaining bulk Charas was put in separate parcel and sealed with seal 'K' at 12 places. Samples were sent for the chemical examination and after investigation, convictappellant was charged for the above offence.
(3.)In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as eight prosecution witnesses, whereas, the accused / respondent through her statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution case and has also denied that the bag Ext.P-3 was not in her conscious possession from which contraband goods were recovered and DW-1 Raju and DW-2 Mane Ram were produced on behalf of the defence.