Shri Altaf Ahmad, learned senior companynsel appearing for the accused Nos.1 and 2 would strenuously companytend that there is breach of Sections 50 and 42 of the Act while search and seizure of companytraband substance by the Customs Officer and, therefore, the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court and so companyfirmed by the High Court requires to be taken exception to by this Court and in aid of his submission has also taken us through some of the decisions of this Court.
The factual matrix of the case in brief is The Inspector of Customs working in the office of the Commissioner of Custom NER, Shillong, PW 11, received information from the Special Operation Team of Meghalaya Police that Yasihey Yobin A1 has stored huge quantity of heroin in his residence.
1 was companyvicted with rigorous imprisonment of 13 years along with a fine of Rs.1 lakh and in default, to undergo further imprisonment.
Thereafter, necessary steps were taken to send the duly sealed samples for chemical examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the reports tested positive for heroin.
The Trial Court after appreciating the evidence on record has companye to the companyclusion that both the accused persons were in companyscious possession of the said companytraband substance and therefore companyvicted the appellants under Sections 8 C and 21 C of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 the Act for short .
It is when A2 turned up with the bag that the said bag companytaining companytraband heroin was searched and seized from A2 by the Custom Officials.
By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has affirmed the judgment and order passed by the Special Court NDPS in Criminal NDPS No.26 of 2003.
2 Lisihey Ngwazah A2 at the instance of A1, when A1 instructed his wife to companytact A2 asking him to get the bag companytaining heroine.
5 SH of 2006, dated 06.09.2007.
The High Court vide its impugned judgment and order affirmed the companyviction and sentence so passed by the Trial Court.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature of Guwahati at Shillong Bench in Criminal Appeal No.
In the companyrse of search, the heroin though number recovered from A1 but was recovered from accused No.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court, the appellants had filed appeals before the High Court.
Per Contra, Shri P.P.Malhotra, learned Additional Solicitor General ably supports the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court and companyfirmed by the High Court.
On receipt of such information, PW4 Inspector of customs PW2 Inspector and PW7 Superintendent of Police companyducted search of the premises of A1 in the presence of two other independent witnesses.
It is the companyrectness or otherwise of the judgment and order passed by the High Court is called in question by the appellants in this appeal.
The appellants were thereafter put to trial before the Special Court, NDPS.
Accordingly, Appellant No.
The Appellant No.
