Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2005 (8) TMI 716

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rgarh dated 5th May, 2000. The trial court had convicted the respondent of the offence under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act and sentenced him to undergo 12 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of rupees one lakh, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment. The facts of the case are that Mangilal, SHO police station, Nimbahera received a secret information at about 4.00 a.m. on 2nd July, 1997 from an informer to the effect that the respondent was carrying 16 kgs. of contraband opium and was likely to pass through Arnoda Bandh with a view to sell that opium. He recorded the information received in the Rojnamacha and sent copy thereof to the Superintendent of Police and the Deputy Superintende .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted, it was found to be opium. The respondent had no valid license to possess opium. Thereafter, necessary steps were taken to prepare samples which were duly sealed and sent for chemical examination to the forensic laboratory, which submitted a report adverse to the respondent to the following effect: On chemical and micro-chemical examination, each of the samples contained in packets marked A1 and B-1 gave positive test for the major chemical constituents of coagulated juice of opium poppy and the sample marked A1 and B-1 were found to contain 5.32% and 5.26% morphine respectively. The respondent was put up for trial before the Special Judge, NDPS Cases who found him guilty of the offence under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act. The ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... edure have the meanings respectively assigned to them in that Code. The Code of Criminal Procedure, however, does not define the word person . Section 2(y) of the Code says that the words and expressions used therein and not defined but defined in the Indian Penal Code have the meanings respectively assigned to them in that Code. Section 11 of the Indian Penal Code says that the word person includes any company or association or body of persons whether incorporated or not. Similar definition of the word person has been given in Section 3(42) of the General Clauses Act. Therefore, these definitions render no assistance for resolving the controversy in hand. .........Therefore, the most appropriate meaning of the word person appears to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on, etc. of varying size, dimension or weight. However, while carrying or moving along with them, some extra effort or energy would be required. They would have to be carried either by the hand or hung on the shoulder or back or placed on the head. In common parlance it would be said that a person is carrying a particular article, specifying the manner in which it was carried like hand, shoulder, back or head, etc. Therefore, it is not possible to include these articles within the ambit of the word person occurring in section 50 of the Act. In view of the principles laid down in the aforesaid judgment of this Court, there is no scope for the argument that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the provisions of Section 50 of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates