The learned Addl.
The prosecution case in nutshell is that on receipt of certain information that the accused is dealing with narcotics, the empowered officer called the panch witnesses and raided the house of the accused.
PW2, the senior Police Officer, also was examined in this case and he gave out the details about the raid and seizure as well as drawing of the Panchnama.
He accordingly, companyvicted the accused of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of rupees one lakh.
While the accused was sitting on a company, the person of the accused was searched and from his pant pocket, 9 gms.
Sessions Judge, on companysideration of the prosecution evidence, came to the companyclusion that prosecution has been able to establish beyond reasonable doubt that Charas was found from the pocket of the trouser of the accused, which weigh about 9 gms.
On appeal by the accused, the High Court affirmed the companyviction and sentence and hence the present appeal.
and as such the accused must be held to have companymitted the offence under Section 20 B 2 of the Act.
B. Pattanaik, J. Leave granted.
The appellant was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mahsaria in the State of Gujarat, for the offence under Section 20 B 2 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as the Act , as he was found in possession of 9 gms.
of Charas on 10 5 1992, which he was selling outside his house.
