ANIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and sentence passed by learned Special Judge Mandi HP in Sessions Trial No. 15 of 2007 titled State Vs. Anil Kumar decided on dated 4.1.2008.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case as alleged by prosecution are that on dated 19.10.2008 at about 10 AM at place Bindravani just 300 metres before Check Post accused was found in exclusive and conscious possession of 1 Kg. and 500 grams of charas. It is alleged by prosecution that when the accused saw the police officials he started moving backward and was chased and was caught hold by ASI Bhim Sain. It is further alleged by prosecution that accused was in possession of bag Ext. P4 in which two poly bags Ext. P5 and Ext. P6 containing charas Ext. P7 recovered. It is further alleged by prosecution that charas was weighed and same was in shape of sticks and coins and on weighment charas was found 1.500 Kgs. It is also alleged by prosecution that two samples of 25 grams each separated and remaining charas was sealed in a parcel. It is further alleged by prosecution that NCB from Ext. PM in triplicate was filled up and specimen seal 'Y' was also took on a piece of cloth and seal after use was handed over to HHC Thakur Singh and same was took into possession vide recovery memo Ext. PE. It is further alleged by prosecution that copy of recovery memo was supplied to accused free of cost and accused signed the same as token of receiving copy. It is further alleged by prosecution that FIR Ext. PL was registered and site plan Ext. PO was prepared. It is also alleged by prosecution that grounds of arrest were communicated to accused vide memo Ext. PD. It is further alleged that thereafter case property was produced before SHO Karam Singh along with NCB form and specimen seal and case property was resealed by SHO Karam Singh with seal 'K'. It is further alleged that SHO also took the specimen seal on NCB form and on piece of cloth. It is further alleged that out of two samples one sample was sent to CFSL Chandigarh along with NCB form vide R.C. No. 189/06 through C. Amar Singh. It is further alleged that special report was sent to S.P. Mandi. It is also alleged by prosecution that as per report of the Chemical Examiner the contraband was charas.

(3.) PROSECUTION also produced following piece of documentary evidence in support of its case: -