9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 1143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mple can be sent within 72 hours. Mere fact that CFSL Form was not prepared at the spot is not a ground for acquittal. No reasoning has been given by the appellant as to why false case has been registered against him. In this case recovery was effected on 02.09.2011 but the witnesses were examined on 01.05.2012 and 30.11.2012 respectively. So due to lapse of memory, the above said discrepancies have occurred. The said discrepancy is not such which goes to the root of the case. Therefore, the conviction recorded by the trial court does not call for any interference and the same stands affirmed. However, in view of Section 427 Cr.P.C, the sentence can be made to run concurrently in appropriate cases. Since the appellant is not facing trial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n inquiry the accused disclosed his name and whereabouts. ASI Baldev Singh disclosed his identity to the accused and told him that the accused is suspected of having contraband in the plastic bag carried by him and he showed his intention to conduct search of the said bag. He also apprised the accused of the fact that accused had a right to get the bag searched either by a Magistrate or by a Gazetted Officer and if he desire, the said officer could be called at the spot. The accused reposed confidence in ASI. Accordingly, the bag was searched which led to recovery of ganja. Two samples of 100 gm each were separated from the same. On weighing, the remaining ganja came to 1 kg 800 gms. The samples and the bulk parcels were sealed by ASI Balde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as preferred the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that no independent witness has been joined in the investigation. It is further contended that no Gazetted Officer was also joined in the investigation. It is further contended that the recovery is stated to have effected on 02.09.2011 but the sample for analysis was sent on 05.09.2011. It is further contended that the CFSL Form was not prepared at the spot which creates dent in the prosecution story. I have considered the said submission but do not find any force in the same. The joining of independent witness is not the rule of law but rule of caution. In case the evidence of official witnesses is trustworthy, in that case conviction can be maintaine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red. The said discrepancy is not such which goes to the root of the case. Lastly, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in case the court is not inclined to accept the prayer for acquittal of the appeal, in that case the sentence of the present case in respect of FIR No. 139 of 02.09.2011 under Section 20 of NDPS Act Police Station Gobindgarh, be ordered to run concurrently with the sentence awarded in respect of FIR No. 120 dated 15.06.2010 under Section 22 NDPS Act Police Station Gobindgarh. The said prayer has been opposed by learned State counsel. As per conviction slip, the appellant is not facing trial in any other case except the case in hand and in respect of FIR No.120 dated 15.06.2010 under Section 22 NDPS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
