9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e doubt. It cannot be allowed to take benefit of the respondent’s inability to establish his defence in 313 Cr.P.C. statement. Mere apprehension of the respondent is not enough. The evidence is scanty and lacking to establish that the contraband was recovered from the possession of the respondent in the manner alleged by the prosecution on the said date and time. Therefore, the respondent rightly deserved the benefit of doubt and the impugned judgment on that score cannot be faulted. - Decided against the revenue - CRL.A.55/2013 - - - Dated:- 29-3-2016 - S. P. Garg, J. For the Appellant : Mr. P. C. Aggarwal, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr.S.S.Das, Advocate with Mr.Tarun Priyadarshi, Advocate ORDER S. P. Garg, J. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ock of the trunk was opened in his presence. It was found containing two zipper bags having 12 small pouches and 4 small pouches respectively. The recovered substance was weighed and it was found to be 600 grams of Hashish. Necessary investigation/proceedings were carried out. Statement of the respondent was recorded under Section 67 NDPS Act. Upon completion of investigation, a complaint case was filed by Mr.Uday Shankar Sharma, complainant, against the respondent for committing offence punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act before the Trial Court. In order to establish its case, the prosecution examined 17 witnesses. CW-1 (Rakesh Singh) was also examined by the prosecution. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the respondent denied his involvem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stance. The Trial Court has noted that the visiting card (Ex. PW1/N) recovered from the respondent did not contain the name of the luggage room. It merely contained the details as luggage room T-302, Main Bazaar, Paharganj. Name of M/s.Ajay Luggage Room, Paharganj, New Delhi did not find mention on the visiting card. It is mystery as to how the Investigating Agency, on their own, came to know that the respondent had booked the iron trunk with M/s.Ajay Luggage Room. Letter (Ex.PW- 2/B) addressed to the Manager of the Luggage Room mentions the name of Hotel Anoop / Ajay Luggage Room. It was, however, not clarified as to how initially name of Hotel Anoop came to be recorded on the letter (Ex.PW-2/B). It is not the case of the prosecution that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ked the luggage in the Luggage Room. No TIP Proceedings for identification of the respondent was conducted. 6. The Trial Court has noted in the impugned judgment that the respondent was not found having any original receipt bearing No.9158, the copy of which (Ex.PW-2/A) was affixed on the trunk. PW-2 (Bhavesh Kumar Pandya) admitted in his Court statement that he had not taken any signatures or other handwriting of the respondent on the receipt issued for booking the trunk. It is highly unbelievable that PW-2 (Bhavesh Kumar Pandya) would not get any signatures of the person who booked the trunk in question with them for a particular duration on any register / document. It is also unclear as to how much payment was received by PW-2 (Bhaves ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om it was meant. 7. The Trial Court in the impugned judgment was skeptical about the identification of the case property. There was overwriting in the digit 8 in the panchnama (Ex.PW-2/C) prepared at Ajay Luggage Room in the absence of the respondent. When the case property was produced before the Court it was having Custom s seal No.6. The Trial Court also noted various discrepancies and contradictions in the testimonies of the panch witnesses PW-7 (Vijay Veer Singh) and PW-9 (Vijay Dhyani). It further observed that the trunk when produced in the Court on 04.07.2007 for the first time was not found properly sealed, as without breaking the seal and without disturbing the paper slip, the thread tied on the trunk could be removed. It also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce. In State of Goa vs. Sanjay Thakran Anr. , (2007) 3 SCC 75, it was held : 16. From the aforesaid decisions, it is apparent that while exercising the powers in appeal against the order of acquittal the Court of appeal would not ordinarily interfere with the order of acquittal unless the approach of the lower Court is vitiated by some manifest illegality and the conclusion arrived at would not be arrived at by any reasonable person and, therefore, the decision is to be characterized as perverse. Merely because two views are possible, the Court of appeal would not take the view which would upset the judgment delivered by the Court below. However, the appellate court has a power to review the evidence if it is of the view that the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
