SPLA/127/2020
2023 Latest Caselaw 182 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                        COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  SPLA No.127 of 2020
                                  With
                                  GA No.80 of 2020
                                  Hon'ble S.K. Mishra, J.

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma, J.

Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State/appellant.

Mr. P.C. Petshali, learned counsel for the respondent.

The defects are not over-ruled, on the undertaking given by the learned Deputy Advocate General that before the case arrives for hearing, a translated copy of the impugned judgment be filed in the Registry.

This is an application filed under Section 378 Sub-section 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code" for brevity), wherein the State of Uttarakhand has sought for the Special Leave to Appeal against the judgment of acquittal recorded by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act, Dehradun in Special Sessions Case No.23 of 2009, vide judgment and order dated 18.01.2020, acquitting the respondent of the offence under Section 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "the NDPS Act" for brevity).

Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State would submit that the detention of contraband from the possession of the respondent was chance detention and there is no prior information to the Police and, therefore, Section 50 could not be applicable in this case. Moreover, he would further submit that Section 50 is also not applicable because of the fact that the contraband was being carried by the respondent in a bag and it was not found from the person.

Mr. P.C. Petshali, learned counsel for the respondent would however submit that the learned Special Judge has not considered this non-compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act to acquit the respondent, rather he has come to the conclusion, basing upon defence evidence and documents, which were produced before this Court while considering bail application of the respondents, like this call detail reports of the Investigating Officer would two other persons, who have inimical relationship with the respondents, taking into consideration the short aspect of this case that the Investigating Officer did not direct his investigation to this specific plea, though raised by the respondents, in this application for bail and absence of any independent witness of the seizure, has led to the acquittal of the respondent.

In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that this is more of a appreciation of evidence and having gone through the judgment impugned, we are also of the firm opinion that the learned Special Judge did not commit any unreasonable appreciation of evidence to come to the conclusion that there is, prima facie, compelling and substantial circumstances to grant Leave to Appeal against him.

In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to allow the Special Leave to Appeal, hence, the same is dismissed being devoid of merits.

Government Appeal, is therefore, not maintainable and the same is hereby dismissed.

All the pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

(Alok Kumar Verma, J.) (S.K. Mishra, J.) 11.01.2023 Grant urgent certified copy as per Rules

PP/SB