TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant. - there is no merit in this appeal - Decided against the appellant. - Abhay Manohar Sapre And Ashok Bhushan, JJ. JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1) This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 31.08.2004 passed by the High Court of Calcutta in C.R.A. No. 269 of 2003 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein and affirmed the orders dated 11.04.2002 and 12.04.2002 of the Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act and VIth Bench, City Sessions Court at Calcutta in N.D.P.S. Case No. 11 of 1998 convicting the appellant herein under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ( hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act ) and sentenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the N.D.P.S. Act by his judgment and orders dated 11.04.2002 and 12.04.2002 found the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of ₹ 1,00,000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year. However, the appellant was acquitted of the offence charged under Section 29 of the NDPS Act. So far as another accused- Anjan De was concerned, he was not found guilty of both the offences under Sections 29 and 21 of the NDPS Act and was accordingly acquitted thereof. 7) Challenging the said order of conviction and sentence, the appellant preferred an appeal being C.R.A. No. 269 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of the appellant. 12) In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the appellant is sufficiently and duly represented throughout in these proceedings and it is not necessary to issue any fresh notice to the appellant and give him another opportunity to engage a counsel of his choice. 13) The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant (accused) was only one and that was in regard to non- compliance of requirements of Section 42 read with Section 50 of the NDPS Act. According to him, the compliance of these Sections being mandatory at the time of search and the same in this case was not done in the manner required by the concerned officials of the Department, the appellant's conviction is rendered lega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... necessary to comply with the requirement of the proviso to Section 42 of the NDPS Act. Such being the position the argument of Shri Jash so far as infraction of Section 42 of the said Act is concerned has no merit at all since PW7 was a Gazetted Officer himself and he conducted the raid and also effected the search and seizure from the Appellant. Now, this brings us to the last ground of Shri Jash that Section 50 of the said Act was not strictly complied with. We have carefully gone through the evidence of P.Ws 4,6, and 7 in this regard and we feel that the provisions of Section 50 of the said Act have been complied with. P.W.4, who conducted the Raid, stated: We gave him off in writing whether he likely to be sear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of contraband articles from the place of occurrence (New Sarat Lodge at 77/1A, A.P.C. Road, Calcutta 700 009) on 21.5.98 at about 16-00 hours in presence of the witnesses and being signed by the Appellant himself. The said contraband articles in question, which was seized from the possession of the Appellant were found to be HEROIN on the basis of the Report (Ext.2) submitted by Chemical Analyst (P.W.2) and even if we leave out the Statement (Ext.6) made by him as he had disclosed on the second day of his production (08.6.98) that he was forced to write his confessional statement on the threat and torture. It is also his allegation that his signature on more or less 18 blank papers were taken by the prosecution we find that the other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
