9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suffer conviction as awarded by the Trial Court. - Decided against the appellants. - Criminal Appeal No. 182 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 29-6-2016 - Abhay Manohar Sapre And Ashok Bhushan, JJ. JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1) This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 18.11.2011 of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Criminal Jail Appeal No. 4 of 2010 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein upholding the order dated 15.01.2010/19.01.2010 passed by the Special Judge(N.D.P.S.Act)/Additional Sessions Judge/IVth Fast Track Court, Dehradun in Special Sessions Trial Case No. 30 of 2006 convicting the appellant under Section 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sheet against the appellant. 3) After examination from forensic laboratory, the item was found as contraband item Cannabis (Charas). The Special Court (N.D.P.S.Act), after hearing the parties on 05.10.2006, framed charge of offence punishable under Section 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act. 4) Prosecution examined the witnesses. However, no evidence in defence was adduced. 5) The Trial Court, after hearing the parties, by judgment/order dated 15.01.2010/19.01.2010 in Special Sessions Trial No. 30 of 2006, found the appellant guilty of charge of offence punishable under Section 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for a period of 10 years and a fine of Rs. One lakh. 6) Aggrieved by the said judgment of the Trial Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent while supporting the view taken by the two Courts below urged that no case is made out to interfere in the impugned order. It was his submission that both the Courts have rightly dealt with the issue on facts and in law including the one argued here and hence the impugned order, which has rightly resulted in appellant s conviction, does not call for any interference. 12) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case we find no merit in the appeal. 13) The High Court dealt with the issue in paragraphs 6 to 9 as under, (6) .I have gone through the documentary and oral evidence on record and found that it has nowhere come on the record that at the time when the accused was inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e year, a minor discrepancy in the time of arrest, can not be said to be material to doubt the prosecution story, it is pointed out that when the recovery is made PW5 Deputy Superintendent of Police Dinesh Singh Rawat (a Gazetted Officer) was called, and this fact itself indicates that prosecution story can not be doubted lightly particularly in view of all the fact that the quantity of Cannabis is 9.300 kilograms. (8) In the above circumstances, having considered submissions of learned counsel for the parties, and after going through the lower court record, this court does not find any illegality or wrong appreciation of evidence made by the trial court. (9) Therefore, the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court req ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arch from the appellant and hence non-recording of such information is fatal to the case of prosecution. 19) We find no merit in the submission because the information received was recorded as a fact in the record. In this view of the matter, this submission is factually incorrect and hence rejected. 20) Learned counsel then urged some points relating to facts. Similarly some points were so technical that they do not need any mention nor elaboration. We were, therefore, not impressed by any of these submissions. These submissions are, therefore, rejected being devoid of any merit. 21) In the light of foregoing discussion, we find no merit in the appeal. The appeal thus fails and is accordingly dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
