Maruthi More, Adilabad Dist. vs The State Of A.P., Rep. By P.P., ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5666 Tel

           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

              CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 951 OF 2010

JUDGMENT:

This Criminal Appeal is filed by the Appellant/Accused

aggrieved by the conviction recorded by the Special Judge for trial

of cases under N.D.P.S.Act-cum-I Additional Sessions Judge,

Adilabad, dt.21.07.2010, in N.D.S.C.No.13 of 2009, convicting the

accused for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of

N.D.P.S.Act, 1985 and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a

period of two years and also a fine of Rs.500/-.

2. Heard both sides and perused the record.

3. Briefly, the case against the appellant/accused is that PW1

and PW2 who are Police Constables found this appellant carrying

bags. Suspecting the contents of the bags, the appellant was

stopped and it was found that the bags contain 4 ½ Kgs. of ganja.

Having followed the procedure under Section N.D.P.S.Act, the said

ganja was seized and samples were sent for the purpose of

analysis and report. A report was received from the FSL,

confirming the contraband seized was ganja.

4. The Police after investigation filed charge sheet for the said

offence under the N.D.P.S.Act. Having framed the charge under

Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S.Act, the learned Sessions Judge

found that the appellant was in illegal possession of 4 ½ kgs. of

ganja and convicted accordingly.

5. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant/accused would

submit that procedure under Section 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S.Act

was violated, for which reason the appellant/accused has to be

acquitted. He further submits that police case has been filed

against this appellant for statistical purpose and there are no

independent witnesses who have stated anything against this

appellant.

6. As seen from the evidence on record, the Police have followed

due procedure under Section 50 of the N.D.P.S.Act and as such,

there is no question of violation of procedure under Section 50 of

the N.D.P.S.Act. For the reason of the appellant was holding these

bags and the Police have found that it contained ganja,

proceedings were initiated before PW5-Gazetted Officer.

7. The quantity seized from the appellant is 4 ½ Kgs. which is

less than commercial quantity and the appellant was aged 35

years at the time of incident which is nearly 15 years ago.

Admittedly, he has dependents to lookafter in the family and there

are no other criminal cases that the appellant is involved in.

8. Keeping in view the time and also there being no

questionable antecedents, the sentence of imprisonment can be

reduced to the period already undergone.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed reducing

the sentence of imprisonment of the appellant to the period

already undergone.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

__________________ K.SURENDER, J Dt.:07.11.2022 tk

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 951 OF 2010

Dt. 07.11.2022

tk