Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Rafeeq @ Raffu Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2025 Latest Caselaw 5591 MP

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 5591 MP
Judgement Date : 17 March, 2025

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rafeeq @ Raffu Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 March, 2025

         NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586




                                                              1                            CRA-11194-2024
                            IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
                                                 ON THE 17th OF MARCH, 2025
                                            CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 11194 of 2024
                                          RAFEEQ @ RAFFU KHAN AND OTHERS
                                                       Versus
                                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           Appearance:
                              Shri Ghan Shyam Pandey - Advocate for the appellants.
                              Ms. Shikha Baghel - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

                           Reserved on: 17.03.2025
                           Pronounced on: 07.04.2025


                                                            JUDGMENT

This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by Special Judge, NDPS Narsinghpur, District- Narsinghpur in SC NDPS/37/2022 dated 20.09.2024 by which the

appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 8 r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with fine amount of Rs.5,000/- each with default stipulation.

2. The fact giving rise to the case before the trial Court is that on 06.08.2022, Sub Inspector Rajesh Sharma (PW-5) got the secret information that two persons riding on motor-cycle were transporting

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

2 CRA-11194-2024 contraband ganja, he wrote the information and called the independent witnesses and sent the information to his immediate superior Sub- Divisional Officer Police, Gadarwara. Along with the force and private persons visited the spot. The appellants were coming on motor-cycle, Sub Inspector Rajesh Sharma (PW-5) stopped them and made the search and seizure of 2.5 kg ganja from the possession of the appellants. After formal proceedings, the appellants were arrested and brought to the police station. The contraband was deposited in the Malkhana. The information was sent to Executive Magistrate and Section 52-A of the NDPS Act proceedings were initiated. The samples drawn out by the Executive Magistrate of which one sample was sent for FSL examination

and as per that FSL report, the contraband was found to be ganja. Charge-sheet was submitted before the trial Court.

3. The trial Court framed the charges under Section 8/20 of NDPS Act and read over to appellants. The appellants abjured the guilt and prayed for trial.

4. The trial Court recorded the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and also examined the appellants. The appellants have taken the defence that they are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case but has not produced any defence witness. After hearing both the parties, the trial Court passed the impugned judgment, hence, this appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the trial

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

3 CRA-11194-2024 Court has not appreciated the evidence in proper perspective and has not observed that the mandatory provisions of NDPS Act has not been followed. He has also submitted that as per the prosecution case itself, the contraband that was recovered from the possession of the appellants, were made homogeneous and the samples were drawn, that is clear violation of the standing procedure of law and no sample was drawn by Executive Magistrate. On the same day, the articles were not properly kept in the Malkhana of the police station. On the next day, the proceedings under Section 52-A of the NDPS Act were initiated and after the mixture, the report has been submitted by the FSL stating that in this the contraband was found to be ganja.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants has relied on the judgment passed in M.Cr.C. No.7965/2011 Dayaram Singh and another Vs. State of M.P. order passed on 04.03.2024 by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in which the Co-ordinate Bench has held that the FSL has not applied the test regarding the presence of tetrahydrocannabinol He has further relied the order of this Court passed in I.A. No.10046/2024 in Cr.A. No.5202/2024 dated 19.02.2025 in which it is held that looking to the above aspect, the appellants are entitled for bail but the trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellants, hence, the appeal be allowed and appellants be acquitted.

7. Learned counsel for the State has opposed and has submitted

that the trial Court has considered each aspect and there is no substance

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

4 CRA-11194-2024 in the appeal. Hence, the appeal be dismissed.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

9. In this case, the recovery has been made from the seat of a motor-cycle in which one appellant was sitting as a driver and another was sitting as a pillion rider and between both of them, in a red coloured bag, the contraband was found measuring 2.5 kg. As per the statement of Rajesh Sharma (PW-5) on 06.08.2022, when he was posted in reporting Police Chowki, Sihora, Police Station Gadarwara as an Assistant Sub Inspector, he got the secret information that in a black coloured Platina motor-cycle, two persons are coming and they are passing towards Linga Pipariya to Kalyanpur and specifications of their colour and body constitution were given. On that he wrote in Ex.P/41 and sent Constable Balbihari Raghuwanshi (PW-3) to call the independent witness who returned along with Deepak Jatav (PW-2) and one Pankaj Sen and the witnesses were communicated the information and panchnama (Ex.P/18) was prepared. He tried to contact to SDOP on mobile but when unable to contact, he sent the intimation through Balbihari Raghuwanshi (PW-3) (Ex.P/43) and issued duty certificate Ex.P/44 in his favour to him.

10. Witness Balbihari Raghuwanshi (PW-3) in clear terms has supported the prosecution case and has submitted that on 06.08.2022, ASI Rajesh Sharma (PW-5) informed him the secret information received regarding the contraband and prepared the panchnama

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

5 CRA-11194-2024 (Ex.P/41) and asked him to call two independent witnesses and on that he called independent witnesses namely Deepak Jatav (PW-2) and Pankaj Sen from the bus stand. On same day on 06.08.2022, he was given intimation to inform to SDOP and with the report and mukhbeer panchnama (secret information), he went to the Office of SDOP and delivered the intimation to concern as per Ex.P/43 and Ex.P/44. Minutely, observed the mukhbeer soochna panchnama (secret information panchnama) (Ex.P/41) that was written down on 06.08.2022 at 12:25 pm in police chowki Sihora and as per Ex.P/43 on the same day through dispatch No.82/2022, the intimation was sent to SDOP Gadarwara that was received on behalf of SDOP by Subhash Kumar (PW-6) Gadarwara on same day i.e. 06.08.2022 at 14:40 hours.

11. Subhash Kumar (PW-6) has, in clear terms, supported that on 06.08.2022, he was posted in SDOP office, Gadarwara as a Reader and on that date Constable No.632 Balbihari Raghuwanshi (PW-6) brought the intimation under Section 42 of the NDPS Act and he received that envelope and had given the receipt in Ex.P/43.

12. Thus, from the above discussion, it is clear that the Police Officer had received the secret information and wrote down it immediately and the information was sent to immediate Superior Officer on same day. Thus, the compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act has been done in the case.

13. The independent witness Deepak Jatav (PW-2) has not

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

6 CRA-11194-2024 supported the prosecution case and has stated that Police got his signature near Village Harrai and Ex.P/18 to Ex.P/39 bears his signature in the lengthy cross-examination by the prosecution but nothing has been brought against the appellants.

14. The Investigating Officer ASI, Rajesh Sharma (PW-5) has submitted that he along with the police force and independent witnesses went towards road from where it was informed that appellants will pass and with the help of accompanying force stopped the motor-cycle in which appellants were going. Between both the appellants red & white coloured bag was found. The motor-cycle was driven by Rafeeq s/o Jabbar and Teerath s/o Ganesh was a pillion rider. They were informed the secret information and panchnama Ex.P/20 was prepared. They were also informed their legal rights that they are entitled to be searched in the presence of Magistrate or Gazetted Officer and served the written intimation to them as Ex.P/20 and Ex.P/22 bears the signature of the appellants and in the search memo, it has been further stated that on search, this original copy of the receipt was recovered from their possession.

15. In the personal search, no contraband was found and when the bag was opened, the contraband was found that was identified and was

made homogeneous, panchnama were prepared as Ex.P/29 and Ex.P/30 with the help of weighing machine that was being brought by Pradeep Shrivas, Sainik Home Guard No.237. The weight of the contraband was

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

7 CRA-11194-2024 taken and as per that it was proved to be 2.5 kg. He also contacted the Executive Magistrate and he was not available, hence, the contraband was sealed on the spot and panchnama regarding non-preparation of sampling panchnama (Ex.P-33) and panchnama of sealed sample (Ex.P/34) were prepared. Appellants were arrested with the contraband and motor-cycle, mobile phones and currency that was Rs.300/- were recovered from Rafeeq and were deposited in the malkhana of the Police Station.

16. The witness Komal Singh Yadav (PW-4) he is another Head Constable of the police has supported the statement of ASI, Rajesh Sharma (PW-5) and no contradiction regarding the proceeding by the Investigating Officer has been brought in the statement of the Rajesh Sharma (PW-5) or in the statement of Komal Singh Yadav (PW-4). Furthermore, Komal Singh Yadav (PW-4) has also stated that on the date of incident, a contraband in the sealed condition that was marked as "A" measuring 2.5 kg, the currency notes of Rs.300/- marked as article "B" and mobile phones of Realme company and Infinix company along with the motor-cycle were handed over to him and he entered the articles in his malkhana register (Ex.P/48) in the entry No.33/22 and he has produced the original malkhana register (Ex.P/48) and the panchnama (Ex.P/49) bears his signature.

17. This witness Komal Singh Yadav (PW-4) has further submitted that on 07.08.2022, Naib Tehsildar, Shweta Bamhore (PW-1)

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

8 CRA-11194-2024 had taken the sample and authenticated the contraband as per Section 52-A of the NDPS Act and the contraband was weighed as per Ex.P/2 when the contraband was handed over to Naib Tehsildar, the panchnama was prepared as Ex.P/3, the panchnama of the seal of the sealed packet was broken (Ex.P/4). On weight being made, the contraband was found to be 2.5 kg and the weighing panchnama is Ex.P/5. Naib Tehsildar Shweta Bamhore (PW-1) has drawn the sample of 50-50 grams that were marked as A-1 and A-2 and the rest of the contraband was marked as article "A" and the panchnama is Ex.P/6. After that the contraband and samples were re-sealed as per Ex.P/7 and again the contraband in the sampled form marked as A, A-1 and A-2 were handed to him for keeping them in malkhana. Photographs were taken.

18. On 08.08.2022 after the proceedings of the sampling, the sample A-1 was handed over to Constable No.632 Balbihari Raghuwanshi (PW-3) to deposit the sample in Forensic Science Laboratory and on the same day Balbihari Raghuwanshi (PW-3) after depositing the sample in FSL, Sagar submitted the receipt of FSL (Ex.P-

46). On 17.09.2022, Sainik 139 submitted FSL examination report and he has made the entry in malkhana register.

19. On this point gone through Ex.P/48, this register has mentioned in the printed form "Madhya Pradesh Sashan Police Vibhag Japt Mal ka Register Police Station Gadarwara O.P. Sihora, District Narsinghpur" and in entry No.33/22 in the column number of the date it

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

9 CRA-11194-2024 has been mentioned 140/06.08.2022, the place of incident has been shown Village Harrai Baranjh Mijore Tigadda near Peepal tree reporting Police Chowki Sihora, Police Station Gadarwara and in the same column, name of the accused persons Rafeeq s/o Jabbar, religion, age and address and in the same entry regarding Teerath Patel has been made and in another column the description of seized article is mentioned as a sealed packed containing 2.5 kg illegal contraband ganja marked as "A" another sealed packed red coloured bag marked as article "B". The black colour Platina motor-cycle whose number is MP 15 MQ 6746 is mentioned and the chassis number of the vehicle has been written. Phone of Infinix company Realme company and a sealed envelope containing Rs.300/- has been mentioned.

20. On 07.08.2022 as per the GD No.161 the contraband was drawn for the sampling and after sampling, three packets of the contraband were returned over to the concerned Police officer on 08.08.2022. As per GD No.181, the article A-1 sample drawn on 07.08.2022 along with the draft 363/2022 was given to Constable No.632 for FSL Sagar and same day on 08.08.2022 as per GD No.202 Constable No. 632 Balbihari Raghuwanshi (PW-3) after depositing the contraband submitted that receipt No.SFSL/SGR/5242/CHE/1094/22 dated 08.08.2022 and as per the daily diary 387/17.09.2022, the FSL report was received, all these facts have been mentioned in the malkhana register of the police station.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

10 CRA-11194-2024

21. Thus, the contraband sample was kept intact. Shweta Bamhore (PW-1) Executive Magistrate/Tehsildar has clearly mentioned that on 07.08.2022 on the requisition form, the SHO Gadarwara, reached at Police Station Gadarwara and the contraband was weighed before the physical verification of the weighing machine, was made and after that seal was broken. Contraband was again weighed, sample of 50-50 grams marked as "A-1" and "A-2" were drawn and after sealing it, the remaining contraband "A" and sample as "A-1" and "A-2" prepared the panchnama (Ex.P/7) and handed over to the in-charge of malkhana as per Ex.P/8, the photographs of samples were taken and certificate was issued as per Ex.P/16.

22. Balbihari Raghuwanshi (PW-3) has clearly stated that on 08.08.2022, he carried the sample of the contraband along with the draft of the SP Narsinghpur and on the same day deposited in FSL Sagar and FSL Sagar issued the receipt as Ex.P/46. Copy of the draft that was submitted along with the sample Ex.P/45, his duty certificate to deposit the contraband in FSL is Ex.P/47.

23. On this point, looking to the draft and receipt, it is clear that on the next day on 08.08.2022 after the proceeding of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act, the sample that was drawn by the Executive Magistrate was deposited in FSL, Sagar and receipt of FSL, Sagar mentions all these facts and as per the FSL report that is admissible without formal evidence as per Section 293 of Cr.P.C. Ex.P/52 mentions that the sample

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

11 CRA-11194-2024 was received regarding crime No.714/2022 of Police Station Gadarwara and there is a mention of draft FSL/363/2022 dated 07.08.2022 and supported that article was received through Constable No.632 Balbihari Raghuwanshi (PW-3) and was sealed with the seal of Police Station Gadarwara and the sample was received on 08.08.2022 and the sample seal was found intact in the sample of contraband.

24. In the finding it has been mentioned that as per the standard, the botanical substance was examined physically, chemically by calistrophic and thin layer chromatography examination, regarding contraband the substance was found to be positive and it was opined that the article was contraband ganja.

25. Learned counsel for the appellant has much relied on two points that the substance was made homogeneous and test on tetrahydrocannabinol was not conducted but in the clear terms, the FSL has reported that it was the contraband ganja. Hence, only on the basis that tetrahydrocannabinol test was not conducted, the whole contraband cannot be said to be a Bhang or any other substance and no question regarding the fact was asked to Investigating Officer and the chemical examiner was not called for cross-examination on the point.

26. In this case, as per statement of the Investigating Officer and Ex.P/30 in a bag, whole contraband was found and it is not the case of the prosecution that there were multiple packets within the bag that were made homogeneous, hence, the appellants are not going to be adversely

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

12 CRA-11194-2024 affected by the sample making homogeneous.

27. As per police officer Rajesh Sharma (PW-5), the detailed information was sent to the S.P. and thus mandatory provisions as per Section 57 of the NDPS Act were followed and the appellants failed to demonstrate that any illegality was committed while the self seizure and keeping the substance in safe custody. Hence, the conviction imposed upon the appellants by the trial Court is affirmed.

28. Looking to the fact that from the possession of the two accused persons, only 2.5 kg contraband has been recovered and the contraband upto 1 kg is small quantity. As per the notification of the Central Government, commercial quantity is 20 kg and looking to the provisions of punishment in Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, when the quantity involves is lesser than commercial quantity but greater than small quantity, as provided is an imprisonment which may extend to 10 years and with the fine amount which may extend to Rs.1 lakh. Thus, no minimum punishment is prescribed for that.

29. Looking to the above facts, appellants substantial jail sentence

is limited only upto 1 year R.I. with the fine amount as imposed by the trial Court. Thus, with the above modification, the conviction is maintained and appeal is disposed off.

30. The case property be disposed of as per the order of the trial Court.

31. Supersession warrant be prepared and sent to the jail

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:16586

13 CRA-11194-2024 authorities.

32. With the copy of the judgment, the record of the trial Court be returned back.

(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA) JUDGE

AT

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter