Chattisgarh High Court
Shalu Nahak vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 June, 2021
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 527 of 2016
Shalu Nahak S/o Pano Nahak Aged About 18 Years R/o Village -
Kodla, Police Station - Kodla, District - Ganjam (Odisha).
---- Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through the In-charge, G.R.P. Thana, Raipur,
District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh).
---- Respondent
For Appellant : None.
For State/Respondent : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel
Judgment on Board
25.06.2021
1. The matter is heard through Video Conferencing.
2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated
17.03.2016 passed in Special Criminal (NDPS) Case No. 834/2015
by the learned Special Judge (under N.D.P.S Act), Raipur, District
Raipur (C.G.) wherein, the Appellant has been convicted for the
offence punishable under Section 20 (b) (ii) (B) of Narcotic Drugs
Psychotropic Substances Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 04
years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-, with default stipulation.
3. According to the case of prosecution, on 03.06.2015, the Sub-
Inspector namely L.S. Rajput received a confidential information
that one person, aged about 18-20 years, is in possession of
Ganja and standing in the Railway Platform, Raipur. On the basis
of said information, He recorded the above information in
Rojnamcha Sanha and prepared Mukhbir Suchna Panchnama in
presence of the witnesses. He also informed about this information
to the higher officials, thereafter he reached the spot along with the
witnesses and police officials. In compliance of Section 50 of the
N.D.P.S. Act, he gave notice to the Appellant and obtained his
consent for search. On being searched, total 10 Kgs. of contraband
Ganja was found from his possession. He seized the above
contraband Ganja and prepared sample packets and after
completion of other formalities he returned to the police station
along with the seized property and the Appellant, then he recorded
the FIR and deposited the seized property in Malkhana thereafter,
sample packets were sent for examination to the FSL. After
completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed by the Police.
To robe the Appellant in the crime-in-question, the prosecution has
examined as many as total 09 witnesses. In the statement of
Appellant recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C, the Appellant has
pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter, however
no defence witness was examined by the Appellant. After
completion of trial, the Trial Court convicted and sentenced the
Appellant as mentioned in Para 01 of this judgment. Hence, this
appeal.
4. A certificate of incarceration sent by the Jail Superintendent,
Central Jail, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) would mention that the
Appellant has undergone the entire jail sentence imposed upon
him by the Trial Court and already released from jail on
02.06.2019.
5. Since no one appears for the Appellant today, I decide this appeal
on merits.
6. On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposed the appeal and
supported the impugned judgment.
7. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and
perused the record minutely. I have also gone through the
statements of the witnesses.
8. Sub-Inspector L.S. Rajput (PW-9), Investigation Officer, supported
the entire case of prosecution and deposed according to the case
of prosecution. His statement is duly corroborated by Constable
Lalmohan Mehta (PW-5), and Constable Purushottam Latare
(PW-6), though Sanjay Baghel (PW-1) and Pramod Tiwari (PW-2),
seizure witnesses of the case have not supported the case of
prosecution. But, there is nothing on record on the basis of which
statements of witnesses Lalmohan Mehta (PW-5), Purushottam
Latare (PW-6) and L.S. Rajput (PW-9) can be disbelieved.
9. Looking to the entire evidence available on record and further
considering the fact that all the mandatory provisions of the Act
have duly complied with. In my considered opinion, the Trial Court
has rightly convicted the Appellant. Consequently, the appeal has
no merit and the same is hereby dismissed.
10. Records of the Court below be sent back along with a copy of this
order forthwith for information and necessary compliance.
Sd/-
(Arvind Singh Chandel)
Judge
Shubham/Vasant
