9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (1) TMI 687X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n brief, the case of prosecution is that informant, on 30-12-2001 gave information to Salim Khan, Station Officer In Charge of Hanumanganj that two persons are staying in room No. 3 of Hotel Banjara and they are having contraband article Brown Sugar for sale. After recording the said information in Rojnamcha the Station Officer Incharge sent Constable Narayan to call two witnesses, thereafter, after the arrival of witnesses namely Mushtak and Kabir and also after doing the needful, the Station Officer Incharge with his force and witnesses, arrived at the said hotel. 3. On knocking the door of room No. 3 of Hotel Banjara two persons came out and they described their names to be Ramaswamy (accused/appellant) and Abdul Zabbar. The Station ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the appellant was charged under Sections 8(c) and 21 of the Act. Needless to emphasis, the appellant abjured his guilt and prayed for the trial. In order to bring home the charges the prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses and placed Exs. P-l to P-4, the documents on record. The defence of accused is of false implication, however, he did not choose to examine any witness in his defence. 6. The Special Judge on scrutiny of the evidence came to hold that the appellant did commit the offence for which he was charged and eventually convicted him and passed the sentence which I have mentioned hereinabove. Hence this appeal. 7. In this appeal Sushri Sunita Chourasiya, learned Counsel for the appellant, has argued that if the e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lves for search vide Panchnama (Ex. 18) at 17.00 hours, on being searched the appellant, a notice under Section 50 of the Act was found in the pocket of his shirt which was wearing and thereafter from his possession a bag was seized and in the said bag a Lungi was found in which in a Polythene contraband article and ₹ 9,000/- were kept. A Panchnama (Ex. P-l 9) in that regard was prepared. The accused/appellant was arrested on the dame day, i.e., 30-12-2001 at 20.00 hours at Police Station, Hanumanganj. Thus, according to the case of the prosecution, the entire proceedings took place in between 1.30 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. It be seen that according to the Station Officer Incharge Salim Khan (P.W. 7) and other witnesses namely Vishwanath Du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed and blinked away and which had also put a dent in the truthness of the prosecution story in order to hold it to be doubtful is that the report of Govt. Opium and Alkaloid Works, Neemuch (M.P.) is Ex. P-9. This report (Ex. P-9) is dated 22-1 -2002 and there is an entry in the report that the sample in the Laboratory was received on 5-1-2002. However, according to Bahadur Patel (P.W. 2) (who is a Constable of Police Station, Hanumanganj and who was deputed to carry the scaled sample of contraband article to Neemuch for its chemical examination) he reached at Neemuch on 7-1-2002 and he deposited the sample of contraband article on that date. The examination-in-chief of this witness is quite relevant in this regard in which he has said that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was arrested and was brought at police station. However, according to hotel manager, the entire proceedings took place in late night. Thus, it raises a doubt in regard to the implication of the appellant in the said offence. 13. If the testimony of Investigating Officer is scrutinized further it would reveal that though he came to know that the person who was having contraband article in the hotel was staying denoting himself to be S. Raman but this fact has not been mentioned in the case diary by him that by fictitious name the appellant Ramaswamy was slaying in the hotel. The Investigating Officer admitted the fact that the appellant is a South Indian and is resident of Chennai. Though he denied the suggestion that appellant knows En ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation of appellant is not proved beyond doubt and implication in the said offence is highly suspicious. The law in this regard is quite clear that the suspicion, however, strong it may be, can not take place of strict proof. Apart from the above said reasonings, I would also like to mention that when the appellant was searched vide Ex. P-19 a notice under Section 50 of the Act was recovered from the pocket of his shirt. There is no indication in the entire investigation that what investigating officer did in regard to that notice. The said notice was also not seized and no seizure memo was prepared and the said notice was also not filed alongwith the charge-sheet. It may be possible that earlier on account of doubt, some other police offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
