TMI Blog2006 (11) TMI 545X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 01.2000, the custom officer raided room No. 102, Yak House, New Tibetan Camp, Majnu Ka Tila, Delhi in presence of two independent witnesses. Appellant Gita Lama Tamang opened the room. He informed that the said room was booked in the name of Feli Bahadur. Notice under Section 50 NDPS Act was given to the appellant but he did not make avail of this opportunity. A blue black zipper bag, containing 104 white coloured capsules, was seized. All the capsules were cut open and powder weighing 874 grams was recovered. One Nepali passport in the name of Gita Lama and a small pocket note bearing mark Shankar were also recovered from the above said blue black zipper bag. 3. The appellant made the following explanation. He had gone to Lahore on 27.01.2000 from I.G.I. Airport, New Delhi. There, he met Anil Kumar Tamang, his co-accused, who gave him above said capsules. He swallowed the same, came back to India via Wagah border, Amritsar, hired a taxi and arrived in Delhi. He took out all the 104 capsules through his rectum, washed them with water and kept the same in a bag, which was finally concealed in the above said blue black zipper bag. Two samples weighing 5 grams each were separated. S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficers in the cases reported in Ahir Raja Kohmia v. State of Sorashtra ,State Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi v. Sunil Kumar 2001 (1) C.C. Cases (SC) 6. In T. Shankar Prasad v. State of Andhra Pradesh Crl. Appeal No. 909 of 1997, decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 12.01.2004, where it was held: The Court may feel safe in accepting the prosecution version on the basis of the oral evidence of the complainant and the official witnesses even if the trap witnesses turn hostile or are found not to be independent. In Dalbir Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab 1977 Cr.L.J. 273 (SC), it was held: Omission to examine material witnesses, who were not deliberately withheld or unfairly kept back, in the circumstances, held, was not sufficient to throw doubt on the prosecution case. 8. In State of Kerala v. M.M. Mathew , it was held that public servants have to be presumed to have acted honestly and conscientiously and their evidence cannot be discarded merely on the ground that they be interested in getting the accused convicted. In this case the conviction of the accused was based on the testimonies of Sales Tax officers. 9. In M. Prabhulal v. The Assistant Director, DRI 2003 (3) CC Cases (SC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o ill will or motive to falsely implicate them in such a serious case. 13. Secondly, the learned Counsel for the appellants picked up a conflict with the above said confessional statements. He vehemently argued that the above said documents were prepared under duress and force. He pointed out that it is apparent that the above said statements were dictated by the custom officer himself. He argued that according to confessional statement made by appellant Gita Lama Tamang, he had stayed in Lahore in 32 Hotel instead of saying it as Badees Hotel. He stressed that this fact is clear pointer towards its involuntariness. 14. I find that this argument is lame of strength. These statements were recorded by the appellants/accused in their own hand writing. Their statements run into six pages and ten pages respectively. I have thoroughly perused their statements. It is apparent that the appellant Gita Lama Tamang knows a Hindi little. Most of the spellings are incorrect. It is quite fathomable that he is likely to make such like mistakes. The appellant has failed to show any part of his statement is incorrect. He has failed to explain as to what business he had got at Lahore. He could n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s well settled that confessional statement of the accused, if found voluntarily and truthful, has substance, it can do without frills. It must be kept in mind that Section 67 of NDPS Act is para-materia to Section 108 of Customs Act. If the confessional statement of the accused stands proved, there is no need of corroboration. This was so held in authorities reported in Ravinder Singh @ Bittoo v. State of Maharashtra 2002 (2) JCC 1059 SC; A.K. Mehboob v. IO, NCB ; Pon Adithan v. Deputy Director, NCB, Madras 1999 (2) JCC SC 335; Kalema Tumba v. State of Maharashtra ; Raj Kumar Karwal v. UOI and Ors. 1991 Cr.L.J. 97 (SC); Emmannuel Uchenna Ezenwosu v. NCB and Ors. 2003 (1) JCC 417. 19. It must be also borne in mind that as against accused Anil Kumar Tamang, there is his confessional statement which is corroborated by the statement of his co-accused Gita Lama Tamang which is admissible in evidence as per authorities reported in Pool Pandi v. Superintendent ; Ramesh Chandra v. State of West Bengal ; Naresh J. Sukhwani v. UOI (SC); Yudhister Kumar v. State and Anr. (DHC), II (1992) CCR 1122. 20. The learned Counsel for the appellants argued with vehemence that the prosecution has fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 26. The next submission made by the learned Counsel for the appellant was that there is a difference in weight of the samples. Case of the prosecution is that sample weighing 5 grams was taken. However, the CFSL report reveals that when it arrived there, it weighed 3.29 grams. 27. To my mind this argument does not turn the corner. There can be many reasons as to why there was difference in weight. In Gurdev Kaur v. State of Haryana 2002 Crl.L.J. 3016 (P H), it was held:- No doubt, in the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban, Ex. PMJ, the weight of the sample of opium had been mentioned as 8.29 grams approximately. This marginal difference in the weight as such cannot be taken as the basis for a conclusion that here had been tampering of the sample during the period Constable Roshan Lal had taken the sample to deposit the same with Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban. 28. Secondly, difference in weight can be due to moisture. 29. Thirdly the sample was found in intact condition having paper slips bearing signatures of the appellant. For all these reasons, the arguments in this respect must be eschewed out of consideration. 30. It was also argued on behalf of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
