Criminal Appeal No. 261 of 1991. Case: Ram Pher Jadav Vs The State. High Court of Calcutta (India)

Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 261 of 1991
CounselFor Appellant: Amit Talukder, Abhijit Chatterjee & Amitabha Karmakar, Advs.and For Respondents: Subhan Lal Hazra & Swapan Kumar Mukherjee, Advs.
JudgesL.M. Ghosh & A. Sengupta, JJ.
IssueCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 162; Narcotics Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 - Section 21
Citation97 CWN 324
Judgement DateSeptember 16, 1992
CourtHigh Court of Calcutta (India)

Judgment:

L.M. Ghosh, J.

  1. The appellant, Ram Pher Jadav, was charged under Section 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 and convicted thereunder by the Sessions Judge, Howrah. He was sentenced to R.I. for 12 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lac, in default, to undergo further R.I. for three years. Ram Pher Jadav has appealed against that order of conviction and sentence. The prosecution made out a case that the appellant was carrying some quantity heroin on 10.9.89. The S.I., Sri Kalyan Kumar Maitra, was on patrol duty. His version is that on 10.9.89 in course of night patrol duty, he reached near Gate No. 2 of Shibpur B.E. College when he found the accused proceeding with a bag in hand. His movement appeared to Sri Kalyan Kumar Maitra (PW-1) as suspicious and his answer was unsatisfactory. PW-1 claims that the person was apprehended and then some substance in a cellophane paper was recovered, which was found out to be heroin. PW-1 prepared a seizure list at the spot, as he claims. We further get from PW-1 that two witnesses, Ibrahim Ansari (PW-3) and Gopal Banerjee (PW-4), were available. The prosecution case is that those two witnesses were having together morning walk, when they were requested by the police officer to co-operate and sign the seizure list. The articles found including the cellophane paper containing the powder (Mat. Ext. IV) were seized as per claim of PW-1. Thereafter, the accused was taken to the Shibpur P.S. with the articles seized. In the police station, PW-1 lodged a complaint in writing. A formal fir was drawn up Shibpur p.s Case No. 226 dated 10.9.89 under Section 21 of the NDPS Act was started against the appellant. The investigation of the case was taken up by PW-6 Sri Ranjit Kumar Das. The articles seized were sent to the Director (Drugs), Central Public Health And Drugs Laboratory. The expert report was that the Black lump was containing heroin. After completing investigation, PW-6 submitted charge sheet against the accused under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, 1985.

  2. During trial, six witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. The accused did not examine any witness.

  3. On consideration of the materials on record, the learned Sessions Judge came to the finding that the accused was guilty. So he convicted the accused and passed sentence, as referred to before.

  4. Mr. Talukdar, the learned advocate, has argued for the appellant. Mr. Hazra, the learned advocate, has argued for the State.

  5. According to Mr...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT