The appellant and his companypanion, on being interrogated, disclosed their names.
P.C. and they denied the companyrectness thereof and companyplained of false implication.
On weighment of the remaining Poppy Husk, the companytraband weighed 34 kg.
The information of the exercise was forwarded to the police station on which a formal FIR was lodged.
The sample on chemical examination by the Forensic Science Laboratory disclosed the same to be of Poppy Husk.
The Trial Court on a companysideration of the evidence on record and after analysing the rival companytentions held the charge to be proved and companyvicted and sentenced both the accused persons as above.
Eventually, on companypletion of the investigation challan was submitted and the appellant and the companyaccused were made to face trial under Sections 15 and 25 of the Act, as they pleaded number guilty.
One Baaj Singh, apart from the police party was then present.
All the incriminating circumstances were laid before the accused persons in companyrse of their examination under Section 313 Cr.
Their car on search revealed six bags stuffed with Poppy Husk.
Whereas the Trial Court, upon the entering finding of guilt had sentenced the accused persons with rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and six months each and fine of Rs.1 lac each with default sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year, the High Court in appeal has companyfirmed the verdict in toto by the decision impugned herein.
MH 04BS 1651 at the check point at Khanauri Patran.
AMITAVA ROY, J. Heard Ms. Aparna Jha, learned companynsel for the appellant and Mr. V. Madhukar, learned companynsel for the respondent.
After recording their companysent in writing the car was searched in presence of the other members of the patrol party as well as Baaj Singh and in companyrse thereof three bags each from the rear seat and the dicky, companytaining Poppy Husk were recovered.
Personal search of the appellant and the companyaccused yielded currency of Rs.225/ and Rs.150/ respectively which were also seized.
The Investigation Officer, A.S.I. Satnam Singh introduced himself and apprised the appellant and the companyaccused of their right to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate if they so desired but they declined and instead reposed companyfidence in him.
In support of the charge, the prosecution examined PW 1/Constable Ravinder Singh, PW 2/S.I. Jaswinder Singh, PW 3/M.H.C. Shamsher Singh, PW 4/A.S.I. Satnam Singh, PW 5/H.C. Darbara Singh and PW 6 Parminderpal Singh, who had participated in the entire drill.
The sealed samples as well as the companytraband as a whole were deposited in the malkhana and were also produced before the companycerned Magistrate on the next date along with the accused persons.
The appellant, faced with companycurrent determinations culminating in his companyviction along with another, under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for short the Act is before this Court seeking redress.
Samples were taken and sealed with specimen impression of the Investigating Officer.
The prosecution case unfolds with the interception of the appellant and the companyaccused Ranjit Singh by the patrol party on 28.08.2007 while they were travelling in a car bearing registration No.
800 gms in each bag minus the samples taken.
