9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such his report falls with the purview of Section 293 Cr.P.C. - appeal dismissed. - Criminal Appeal No. 516 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 13-4-2017 - C. T. Selvam, J. For the Appellant : Mrs.Mamta Pandey For the Respondent : Mr.N.P.Kumar, Special Public Prosecutor (NCB Cases) JUDGMENT This appeal arises against the judgment of learned Special Judge, I Additional Special Court under NDPS Act, Chennai, passed in C.C.No.64 of 2007 on 09.01.2014. 2. Appellant/A2 faced trial in C.C.No.64 of 2007 on the file of learned Special Judge, I Additional Special Court under NDPS Act, Chennai, for offences u/s.8(c) r/w 21(c), 8(c) r/w 27(A), 8(c) r/w 28 8(c) r/w 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 amended by Act 9/2001. The case of the prosecution is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04.2007 (Ex.P18) and he has submitted his report under communication dated 29.06.2007 (Ex.P21). The quantitative analysis test had been called for under communication of the Special Judge under D.No.366 of 2007 dated 30.04.2007 and the report there regards is dated 20.06.2007 (Ex.P50). According to learned counsel, Ex.P21 only informs the presence of heroin in the sample examined. The quantitative analysis report in Ex.P50 was for the first time brought before Court only on 26.03.2013. The same was unreliable, particularly, where the same had been prepared by a Scientific Assistant, Grade II, a person not covered by Section 293 Cr.P.C. The report had come to Court 7 years after the occurrence. Learned counsel contended that in circumstance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and found that the petitioner/second accused had carried and tried to export (2825 gms x 31.99/100) 903.72 gms. of heroin which fell within 'commercial quantity' as per entry No.56 of the Notification issued by the Central Government in S.O.1055(E) dated 19.10.2001. Learned Special Public Prosecutor further clarifies that assisted by Scientific Assistant Grade-II the quantitative analysis report had been prepared by one Karthikeyan, Assistant Director and Assistant Chemical Examiner to Government as was evident from Ex.P50. U/s.293 Cr.P.C. his report was admissible in evidence without his examination. 7. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 8. Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reads as follows: 293. Reports of certain Government scientific experts.- (1) Any document purporting to be a report under the hand of a Government scientific expert to whom this section applies, upon any matter or thing duly submitted to him for examination or analysis and report in the course of any proceeding under this Code, may be used as evidence in any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code. (2)The Court may, if it thinks fit, summon and examine any such expert as to the subject-matter of his report. (3)Where any such expert is summoned by a Court and he is unable to attend personally, he may, unless the Court has expressly directed him to appear personally, depute any responsible officer working with him t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
