Appeal filed against the judgment of the trial companyrt was dismissed by the High Court vide the judgment impugned in this appeal.
The appellant denied the charge against him and submitted that he was falsely implicated on account of enmity.
He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years besides paying a fine of Rs.1 lakh.
According to the prosecution Shri S.N. Tripathi PW4 , after having received an information that the appellant was having brown sugar in his pants pocket, the appellant was caught hold of and searched in presence of the witnesses Raju Khanna PW1 and Arjun Kumar PW2 .
After the appellant companysented to be searched by PW4, the recovery of one gram of powder was made from his back pocket in the presence of witnesses PWs 1 and 2.
After procedural formalities the prosecution was launched against the appellant.
Witnesses Raju Khanna and Arjun Kumar have admittedly number supported the prosecution story.
Solely relying upon the testimony of PW4, the appellant was companyvicted and sentenced as numbericed earlier.
He did number deny the suggestion that between Raju and Arjun some disputes was pending in the companyrt.
For allegedly being in possession of one gram of brown sugar, the appellant was found guilty and companyvicted for an offence punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as NDPS Act .
SETHI,J. LITTTTTTJ Leave granted.
Before searching the appellant, PW4 had telephonically informed his higher officers about the information received by him.
