CRL. A. NO. 37 of 2006
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 37 OF 2006
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
.....
APPELLANT
VERSUS
BHOPA RAM
.....
RESPONDENT
O0 RDER
1.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
2.
This appeal against acquittal arises from the
judgment of the High Court in a prosecution under Section
8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
The trial court, relying on the evidence of P.Ws. 4, 5, 11
and 12, convicted the respondent and sentenced him to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to a fine of
Rs. 1 lakh and in default thereof to further undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of six months. The judgment of
the trial court has been reversed in appeal. The High
Court has recorded a positive finding that the prosecution
story given in Exhibit P2 the notice issued under Section
50 of the Act was a concoction. In other words, the High
CRL. A. NO. 37 of 2006
Court has doubted the very factum of the recovery. Dr.
Manish Singhvi, the learned Additional Advocate General for
the State has, however, argued that in the facts of the
case, Section 50 was not applicable. This submission is
undoubtedly correct insofar as the import of the provision
is concerned but the High Court has on a consideration of
the evidence held that as Exhibit P2 had been apparently
created after the recovery had been made and there appeared
to be some doubt as regards the recovery itself casting a
doubt on the conduct of the investigation. We are thus not
inclined to interfere in this matter.
We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal.
...........................
J
[HARJIT SINGH BEDI]
...........................
J
[CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD]
NEW DELHI
OCTOBER 26, 2010.