The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Iqbal
2022 Latest Caselaw 9314 MP

                                                                              1
                                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                      AT INDORE
                                                                           BEFORE
                                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                                                      ON THE 11th OF JULY, 2022

                                                           MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 15625 of 2022

                                                    Between:-
                                                    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                                    HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
                                                    SOYATKALAN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                          .....PETITIONER
                                                    (SHRI RAHUL SOLANKI DY. G.A. APPEARING ON BEHALF OF
                                                    ADVOCATE GENERAL.

                                                    AND

                                            1.      IQBAL S/O RASHID , AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
                                                    PAATAN,    TEHSIL   PAATAN,  DISTRICT-
                                                    JHALAWAR (RAJASTHAN)

                                            2.      ABDUL AJEEJ S/O JAMAAL KHAN , AGED
                                                    ABOUT 55 YEARS, INDORE GATE PAATAN
                                                    (RAJASTHAN)

                                            3.      TEEKAM @ TINKU S/O MAANAKCHANDRA ,
                                                    AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, PEEPLI BAZAR,
                                                    GHAALRAPAATAN, THANA GHAALRAPAATAN
                                                    (RAJASTHAN)

                                                                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
                                                    (NONE)

                                                  This application coming on for admission this day, after hearing the
                                            counsel for State, the court passed the following:
                                                                               ORDER

The applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh has preferred this petition under Section 378 (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of leave to Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR

appeal against judgment dated 29.11.2021 passed by Special Judge (NDPS Act) Date: 2022.07.15 18:56:25 IST

Shajapur, (MP) in Special ST No.04/2011, whereby the respondents/ accused

persons have been acquitted from offence punishable under Sections 8(C)/20(B)(ii) (b) of the NDPS Act.

Prosecution story in brief is on 08.02.2011, on the basis of a discreet information, the police has intervened a car Bearing Registration No.RJ-28-C- 1510 and on being searched 12 KG and 200 grams of cannabis was recovered kept below the driver seat. Hence, the police has arrested the respondents and filed the charge-sheet against them.

Thereafter, the learned Special Judge, after considering the material available on record and the statements of the witnesses, has acquitted the respondents from the charges as stated above vide judgment dated 29.11.2021,

hence, being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgement applicant/State has preferred this application for leave to appeal.

Learned counsel for the applicant/state submits that learned Court has ignored the fact that the prosecution has successfully established the ingredients of offence against the present respondent / accused persons. The learned trial Court has acquitted the respondents even after having proper evidence against them. The learned trial Court has committed grave error of law and facts available on record. Therefore, sufficient evidence is available for convicting the present respondent / accused persons, but the learned Court has not properly appreciated the evidence and wrongly acquitted the respondents from the charges.

I have heard the counsel for the State and perused the record. From the face of record and the impugned order, it is crystal clear that

Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by the learned Special judge has found non-compliance of the provisions of SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.07.15 18:56:25 IST Section 55 and 52(A)(ii) of the Act, independent witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution, police witness Mukesh Rawat has turned hostile

regarding the place and time of the incident. Hence, the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondents. The admission is declined and petition is dismissed.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE amit

Signature Not Verified VerifiedDigitally Digitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.07.15 18:56:25 IST