SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Tmt.C.THIRUMAGAL, M.L.,Principal Special Judge, EC & NDPS Court, ChennaiDate of Judgment: 06.08.2024Calender Case No.301/2022 inTNCH0A-0005916-2022inv spp kj saravanan argued conviction order

by ·

FORM A
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL SPECIAL COURT UNDER EC & NDPS ACT CHENNAI.
PRESENT: Tmt.C.THIRUMAGAL, M.L.,
Principal Special Judge, EC & NDPS Court, Chennai
Date of Judgment: 06.08.2024
Calender Case No.301/2022 in
TNCH0A-0005916-2022
in
Crime No.695/2021
(On the file of the Inspector of Police, C1.Flower Bazaar P.S.,)
COMPLAINANT The State of Tamil Nadu
represented by:-
The Inspector of Police,
C1.Flower Bazaar Police Station, Chennai.
REPRESENTED BY Thiru.K.J.Saravanan,
Special Public Prosecutor.
ACCUSED 1.Senthil Kumar, M/A 50 yrs (2021),
S/o.Sadampaya Devar,
South Street,
Kanavaipatti, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
2.Joseph, M/A 58 yrs (2021),
S/o.Mariya Susai,
No.2/3. F-First Floor,
Yusuf Khan Street, Cheapakkam, Chennai-02.
3.Alavudeen, M/A 54 yrs, (2022),
S/o.Kadar Suldhan,
No.88/1. Samy Nayakkan Street, Chindatripet, Chennai-02.
REPRESENTED BY M/s.A.Arulsamy for A1
M/s.J.Samiuallah for A2 and A3
FORM B
Date of Offence 17.12.2021
Date of FIR 17.12.2021
Date of Charge sheet 11.10.2022
Date of Framing of Charges 14.07.2023
Date of commencement of evidence 03.04.2024
Date on which Judgment is reserved 30.07.2024
Date of the Judgment 06.08.2024
Date of the Sentencing Order, if any 06.08.2024
Accused Details:
Rank of the
Accused Name of the Accused Date of Arrest Date of release on bail0 Offences charged with Whether acquitted or convicted Sentence Imposed Period of detention undergone during the trial for the purposes of Section 428 Cr.P.C.

  1. Senthil Kumar,
    S/o.Sadampaya
    Devar 17.12.21 Released on bail by the
    Hon’ble
    High Court, Madras in Crl.O.P.No. 2386/2022, dt.02.02.22 u/s.8(c) r/w 29(1),
    20(b)(ii)
    (B) and
    25 of
    NDPS
    Act Convicted Mentioned below Mentioned below
    2 Joseph,
    S/o.Mariya
    Susai 17.12.21 Released on
    bail in
    Crl.M.P.No. 257/2022, dt.04.02.22 u/s.8(c) r/w 29(1),
    20(b)(ii)
    (B) and
    25 of
    NDPS
    Act Convicted Mentioned below Mentioned below
  2. Alavudeen,
    S/o.Kadar
    Suldhan, 17.12.21 Released on
    bail in
    Crl.M.P.No. 4072/2021, dt.22.01.22 u/s.8(c) r/w 29(1),
    20(b)(ii)
    (B) and
    25 of
    NDPS
    Act Convicted Mentioned below Mentioned below
    FORM C
    LIST OF PROSECUTION/DEFENCE/COURT WITNESSES
    A. Prosecution:
    RANK NAME NAME OF EVIDENCE
    PW1 Tr.Bakkiyaraj Duty Officer/Occurrence Witness
    PW2 Tr.Rajasekar Mahazar/Confession/Occurrence Witness
    PW3 Tr.Ramesh Expert Witness
    PW4 Tmt.Shobhana Investigation Officer
    PW5 Tr.Thalavaisamy Investigating Officer
    B. Defence Witnesses : NIL
    C. Court Witnesses, if any: NIL
    LIST OF PROSECUTION/DEFENCE/COURT EXHIBITS
    A. Prosecution:
    Sr.No Exhibit Number Description
    1 Exhibit P-1/PW1 Information
    2 Exhibit P-2/PW1 Search Notice
    3 Exhibit P-3/PW1 Seizure mahazar (A1)
    4 Exhibit P-4/PW1 Seizure Mahazar (A2)
    5 Exhibit P-5/PW1 Seizure Mahazar (A3)
    6 Exhibit P-6/PW1 Photograph of two wheeler bearing Reg.No.TN06
    9672 (seized from A1)
    7 Exhibit P-7/PW1 Arrest intimation
    8 Exhibit P-8/PW1 Report u/s.57 of the NDPS Act
    9 Exhibit P-9/PW3 This court’s letter to Lab
    10 Exhibit P-10/PW3 Lab Report
    11 Exhibit P-11/PW4 First Information Report
    12 Exhibit P-12/PW4 Form-91
    B. Defence:
    Sr.No Exhibit Number Description
    1 Exhibit D-1/PW4 Arrest Card of A1
    2 Exhibit D-2/PW4 Arrest Card of A2
    3 Exhibit D-3/PW4 Arrest Card of A3
    C. Court Exhibits: NIL
    D. Material Objects:
    Sr.No MO Number Description
  3. MO1/PW1 S1-Sample from P1 (Seized from A1)
  4. MO2/PW1 S2 – Sample from P1 (Seized from A1)
    3 MO3/PW1 P1 – remaining bulk ganja (Seized from A1)
    4 MO4/PW1 S3-Sample from P2 (Seized from A2)
    5 MO5/PW1 S4 – Sample from P2 (Seized from A2)
    6 MO6/PW1 P2 – remaining bulk ganja (Seized from A2)
    7 MO7/PW1 S5-Sample from P3 (Seized from A3)
    8 MO8/PW1 S6 – Sample from P3 (Seized from A3)
    9 MO9/PW1 P3 – remaining bulk ganja (Seized from A3)
    This case came up on 31.07.2024 for final hearing before me, upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing the arguments of
    Thiru.K.J.Saravanan, Learned Special Public Prosecutor, for the Complainant and upon hearing the arguments of learned counsels M/s. for A1, Mr.J.Samiuallah for A2 and A3 and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following :
    JUDGMENT
    The Final Report has been filed by the Inspector of Police, C1.Flower Bazaar Police Station that A1 to A3 had criminally conspired with them for transportation and selling of ganja and in pursuance of the said conspiracy, on 17.12.2021 at around 04.00 a.m. near Venkatramana Travels, Platform of Walltax Sali, A1/Senthilkumar, A2/Joseph and A3/Alavudeen, who was standing along with his two wheeler bearing
    Reg.No.TN06 9672 were found illegal possession of 1 Kg, 1 Kg and 1.500 Kgs of ganja respectively for the purpose of selling and thereby A1 to A3 had committed an offence u/s.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B), 25 and 29(1) of the NDPS Act.
  5. The prosecution case is as follows :
    On 17.12.2021 at 03.00 a.m, PW1/Mr.Packiyaraj, Sub-Inspector of Police, Flower Bazaar had received an information through phone while he was at station on duty that “near Venkatramana Travels,Platform of Walltax Road, one Senthil Kumar, M/A 50 yrs, along with Joseph, M/A 58 yrs, and Alavudeen, M/A 57 yrs were selling ganja.” PW1 reduced the said information in writing, which is marked as Ex.P.1 and submitted before his immediate superior officer PW4/Mrs.Shobana, Inspector of Police for obtaining his approval. After getting permission from PW4, PW1 along with his team of PW2/Mr.Rajasekar, Gr.I.PC (39612) and LW3/Mr.Nethaji, Gr.II.PC48628 reached the spot with NDPS Kits. At around 04.00 p.m., on identification made by the informant, PW1 and his team intercepted them and PW1 enquired them. They revealed their names and addresses and PW1 conveyed them about the information which already he received. Further he conveyed them to be searched and also explained them the provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act that they have the rights to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. All the three persons allowed PW1 to search them. During the search, PW1 called the public for independent witnesses to be the witnesses for search. Since public refused to be the independent witnesses for search, PW1 had conducted the search in the presence of official witnesses such as PW2/Mr.Rajasekar, Gr.I.PC (39612) and LW3/Mr.Nethaji, Gr.II.PC-48628. At the scene of occurrence, PW1 had prepared Search Notice to A1 to A3, which is Ex.P.2 and issued them. PW1 had got signatures of accused persons A1 to A3, witnesses in Ex.P.2 and he also signed them. At the time of search, A1 had produced a bag. In that bag, the contraband which appears to be ganja was found. The weight of the contraband was 1 Kg. Two samples each weighing 50 grams were drawn. The samples were marked as S1 and S2 and the remaining contraband was also marked as P1. All were packed separately and sealed them. The detailed label which were signed by A1, witnesses and PW1 was also affixed on S1, S2 and P1. The said contraband was seized under mahazar, which is Ex.P.3 at 05.00 a.m. from A1 and the mahazar is marked as Ex.P.3. After then, A2 had produced a bag. In that bag, the contraband which appears to be ganja was found. The weight of the contraband was 1 Kg. Two samples each weighing 50 grams were drawn. The samples were marked as S3 and S4 and the remaining contraband was also marked as P2. All were packed separately and sealed them. The detailed label which were signed by A2, witnesses and PW1 was also affixed on S3, S4 and P2. The said contraband was seized under mahazar, which is Ex.P.4 at 05.30 a.m. from A2 and the mahazar is marked as Ex.P.4. After then, A3 had produced a bag. In that bag, the contraband which appears to be ganja was found. The weight of the contraband was 1.500 Kg. Two samples each weighing 50 grams were drawn. The samples were marked as S5 and S6 and the remaining contraband was also marked as P3. All were packed separately and sealed them. The detailed label which were signed by A3, witnesses and PW1 was also affixed on S5, S6 and P3. Apart from that, one two wheeler bearing Reg.No.TN06 9672, which was kept by A3 at the incident place was also seized. The said contraband and vehicle was seized under mahazar, which is Ex.P.5 at 06.00 a.m. from A3 and the mahazar is marked as Ex.P.5. The photographs of two wheeler is marked as Ex.P.6. After then the arrest intimation was given to A1 to A3, which is marked as Ex.P.7 at 06.30 a.m.. Then, PW1 returned to police station with accused persons and seized properties and handed over to PW4 along with report u/s.57 of NDPS Act at 07.00 a.m. The report is marked as Ex.P.8. Then PW4 registered an FIR in Crime No.695/2021 at 07.00 a.m. for the alleged offences u/s.8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B) and 25 of NDPS Act. FIR is marked as Ex.P.11. She recorded the statements of all witnesses. Then she produced the accused before the learned VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town for remand along with properties under Forms-91 and the accused were remanded to judicial custody by him. The Form-91 is marked as Ex.P.12. The contraband along with samples and vehicle were produced by PW4 before this court on 25.02.2022 vide A.No.117/2022 and B.No.45/2022 along with requisition to send the samples to lab. On requisition of PW4, the samples S1 from P1, S3 from P2, S5 from P3 were sent to Lab vide this court’s letter dt.25.02.2022 through Mrs.Gomathi, Gr.I. WPC(29562). This court’s letter to lab is marked as Ex.P.9. After chemical examination completed by PW3/Mr.Ramesh, Chemical Examiner, the test report was prepared on 09.06.2022 and sent to this court on 29.06.2022, which is marked Ex.P.10. At this juncture, PW4 had transferred to some other station and she had handed over entire case records to PW5/Mr.Thalavaisamy, Inspector of Police. PW5 recorded the statement of Mr.Ramesh/PW3, Chemical Examiner. After completing investigation, PW5 had filed the Charge Sheet against A1 to A3 u/s.8(c) r/w 29(1), 20(b)(ii)(B) and 25 of NDPS Act.
  6. On appearance of the accused, free copies were furnished to the accused. On21.07.2022, the charges u/s.8(c) r/w 29(1), 20(b)(ii)(B) and 25 of the NDPS Act were framed against the accused A1 to A3. When the charge was read over and explained to the accused in Tamil, they denied the same, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
    4.On completion of the examination of the prosecution witnesses, the prosecution side evidence was closed by the Learned Special Public Prosecutor with the examination of PW1 to PW5. On the side of the prosecution PW1 to PW5 were examined. Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.12 were marked and M.O.1 to M.O.9 were also marked. When the accused was questioned u/s.313(i)(b) of Cr.P.C., as to the incriminating evidence against them in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, they denied the same as false. Though the accused A1 to A3 had stated that they have witnesses on their sides, but no witness was examined and Ex.D1 to Ex.D3 were marked while cross examination of PW4 were marked on the side of accused. Both sides heard.
  7. Whether the prosecution had proved the charges u/s. 8(c) r/w 29(1), 20(b) (ii)(B) and 25 of the NDPS Act against the accused A1 to A3?
  8. THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION:
  9. The prosecution case is that A1 to A3 had criminally conspired with them for illegal transportation and selling of ganja and in pursuance of the said conspiracy, on 17.12.2021 at around 04.00 a.m. near Venkatramana Travels, Platform of Walltax Sali, A1 to A3 were found in illegal possession of 1 Kg, 1 Kg and 1.5 Kgs of ganja respectively. On 17.12.2021 at 3.00 a.m. PW1 had received an information while he was at station on duty from the informant and the same was reduced into writings in Ex.P.1 and the same had also been submitted before his superior PW4 for the purpose of obtaining permission. In Ex.P.1/Information, PW4 had also given permission to PW1 for further proceedings on the same day itself ie.17.12.2021. Therefore, the mandatory provision u/s.42(2) of the NDPS Act was complied by PW1.
  10. PW1 went to spot along with PW2 and LW3 with kits. On identification made by the informant, PW1 and his team intercepted the accused persons A1 to A3 and introduced themselves and after confirmation and identification of the accused persons, PW1 had issued Notices u/s.50(1) of the Act to the suspected persons for searching under the provisions of this Act. The search notice to accused personsis marked as Ex.P.2, which was signed by accused A1 to A3, witnesses and PW1. Since the independent witnesses had refused to be the witnesses for search, PW1 requested the police people to be the witnesses, who accompanied him. At the same time, in that notice, the right was properly conveyed to the accused A1 to A3, which provides u/s.50(1) of the NDPS Act.
    Hence, the provision u/s.50(1) of the NDPS Act is complied.
  11. After issuing notice u/s.50(1) of the NDPS Act and after getting consent from the suspected persons, the search and seizure was made by PW1 in the presence of PW2 and LW3. At the time of search, A1/Senthil Kumar had produced a bag before PW1. The said bag was opened by PW1. It was found the contraband appears to be ganja and the same was poured into newspaper and weighed the same as 1 Kg. Two samples each weighed at 50 grams were drawn from the said contraband. The said two samples, which were marked as S1 and S2 were packed separately and sealed them. The remaining contraband, which was marked as P1 was also packed and sealed it. The detailed labels, which were signed by A1/Senthil Kumar, witnesses and PW1 were also pated on S1, S2 and P1. All were seized under mahazar, which is Ex.P.3 at 05.00
    a.m. Further, A2/Joseph had produced another bag, which was kept him before PW1. The said bag was opened by PW1. It was found the contraband appears to be ganja and the same was poured into newspaper and weighed the same as 1 Kg. Two samples each weighed at 50 grams were drawn from the said contraband. The said two samples, which were marked as S3 and S4 were packed separately and sealed them. The remaining contraband, which was marked as P2 was also packed and sealed it. The detailed labels, which were signed by A2/Joseph , witnesses and PW1 were also pated on S3, S4 and P2. All were seized under mahazar, which is Ex.P.4 at 05.30 a.m. Further, A3/Alavudeen had produced another bag, which was kept him before PW1. The said bag was opened by PW1. It was found the contraband appears to be ganja and the same was poured into newspaper and weighed the same as 1.500 Kg. Two samples each weighed at 50 grams were drawn from the said contraband. The said two samples, which were marked as S5 and S6 were packed separately and sealed them. The remaining contraband, which was marked as P3 was also packed and sealed it. The detailed labels, which were signed by A3/Alavudeen , witnesses and PW1 were also pated on S3, S4 and
    P2. All were seized under mahazar, which is Ex.P.5 at 06.00 a.m. PW1 had also seized Black Colour Honda Activa bearing Reg.No.TN06 9672, which was used by A3/Alavudeen under the same mahazar/Ex.P.5. Later on the
    Samples S1 to S6 are marked before this court as MO1, MO2, MO4, MO5,
    MO7, MO8 respectively and P1 to P3 are marked before this court as MO3, MO6 and MO9 respectively. In the seizure mahazars, it was clearly cited about the lifting of samples from the bulk contraband and the Samples were packed separately and sealed and also were clearly marked and the remaining contraband was repacked in a clear manner. Therefore, the search and seizure was made by PW1 as per provision of the act in the presence of witnesses at the spot.
  12. After completing the seizure, the arrest intimation, which is Ex.P.7 was issued to A1 to A3 by PW1 at 6.30 a.m. After then PW1 had returned to station along with accused persons and seized properties. He had handed over the accused persons and seized properties along with report u/s.57 of the NDPS Act, which is Ex.P.8 to his superior PW4/Mrs.Shobhana, Inspector of Police. After then, the FIR, which is Ex.P.11 was registered by PW4 at 07.00 a.m. on the very same day in Crime No.695/2021 for the alleged offences u/s.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii) (B) and 25 of the NDPS Act. The Voluntary confessions of A1 to A3 were recorded by PW4 at the station and then arrest cards of A1 to A3 which are Ex.D1 to Ex.D3 were prepared by PW4. All the three accused A1 to A3 were produced before the Magistrate at 18.15 hours along with Forms-91 on the very same day by PW4. Form-91 is marked as Ex.P.12. On 25.02.2022, the contrabands P1 to P3, samples S1 to S6, Two wheelers Honda Activa bearing Reg.No.TN06 9672 were produced before this court by PW4 in A.No.117/2022 and B.No.45/2022. The samples S1, which was lifted out from P1 seized from A1 and the sample S3, which was lifted out from P2 seized from A2 and the sample S5, which was lifted out from P3 seized from A3 were sent to Lab through this court’s letter by one Mrs.Gomathi, Gr.I.WPC and the court’s letter is marked as Ex.P.9. The property was produced before this court and the sample was also sent to Lab on the very same day. In the Lab Report/Ex.P.10, the samples which were sent was found to be ganja.
  13. PW1 had clearly deposed before this court about the compliance of provisions under this Act. PW2/Mr.Rajasekar, who is one of the seizure and confession witness had also corroborated the evidence of PW1. Since the public had not come forward as a witness, police people had stood as a witness for seizure mahazar, search memo and as well as during the confession statement obtained from the accused. That is the only drawback for prosecution. But the seizure witness PW2, who accompanied PW1 had also corroborated the evidence of PW1. Otherwise, on going through the Ex.P.1 to Ex.P12 and other relevant documents and evidence of PW1 to PW5, the facts deposed in evidence and the date and time of arrest, seizure, confession statement and filing of FIR were very cogent and reliable.
  14. So, from the aforesaid evidence, it is very clear that the act, proceeding and document which were before the court were very cogent and reliable.
  15. The defence counsel for A2 and A3 during his argument had pinpointed the fact that all the witnesses are police officials and no independent witnesses are enquired by the prosecution. Non-production of independent witnesses is fatal to the prosecution case and hence the accused deserves for acquittal. Admittedly, no such independent witness was produced by PW1 in this case. Generally, for these type of offence under NDPS Act, public would not come forward to be the witnesses for the search, seizure, arrest and other procedure. The prosecution also had not taken any action against the independent witnesses, who refused to be the witnesses under the procedure of NDPS Act.
    That is entirely different. At the same time, it is not fatal to the prosecution case and the said argument by the defence counsel is rejected.
  16. The defence counsel for A2 and A3 during his argument had pinpointed the fact that as per Ex.D1 to Ex.D3, the arrest cards of A1 to A3 respectively, which were prepared by PW4, it is clearly mentioned that the accused persons were brought to police station at 10.30 a.m. But the FIR was registered by PW4 at 7.00 a.m. The voluntary confession of A1 to A3 were recorded by PW4 at station at 7.30 a.m. onwards. Hence, it is clear that police people have created all the documents at the station and the signatures of the accused persons were obtained on the documents and all the three accused persons are innocents and they deserve for acquittal. On perusal of records, the information was received by PW1 at 03.00 a.m. on 17.12.2021 while he was at station and the same was recorded in Ex.P.1. Ex.P.1 was also submitted by PW1 before his superior PW4/Inspector of Police for obtaining his permission. After obtaining her permission only, he proceeded to the spot along with his team. On identification made by the informant only, PW1 and his team had intercepted the accused persons A1 to A3 at the incident place. He had issued search notice, which is Ex.P.2 to the accused persons A1 to A3 as per Sec.50(1) of the NDPS Act, which is mandatory. After then, 1 Kg of ganja was seized from A1/Senthil Kumar at 05.00 a.m under mahazar, which is Ex.P.3 in the presence of witnesses and 1 Kg of ganja was seized from A2/Joseph at 05.30 a.m. under mahazar, which is Ex.P.4 in the presence of witnesses and 1.500 Kgs of ganja was seized from A3/Alavudeen at 06.00 a.m. under mahazar, which is Ex.P.5 in the presence of witnesses. The arrest intimation was given by PW1 at 06.30 a.m. to A1 to A3 and the arrest intimation is marked as Ex.P.7. PW1 had produced the accused persons, seized contraband to his superior PW4 along with report u/s.57 of the NDPS Act, which is Ex.P.8 at 07.00 a.m. After receiving the said report, PW4 had registered the FIR at 07.00 a.m. against these three accused persons A1 to A3. Confessions of A1 to A3 were recorded by PW4 at 07.30 onwards. Admittedly the arrest cards of A1 to A3, which are Ex.D1 to Ex.D3 were prepared by PW4 only. Admittedly, in the said arrest cards/Ex.D1 to Ex.D3, it has been mentioned that the accused persons A1 to A3 were brought to station at 10.30 hours on 17.12.2021. After registering the FIR by PW4, the said arrest Cards/Ex.D1 to Ex.D3 were prepared by PW4. The said contradiction is minor one and the same does not affect the case of the prosecution in any way. The accused persons A1 to A3 were caught red handedly at the spot and the contraband were also seized from the illegal possession of them and the same was proved as ganja by the prosecution through the prosecution witnesses as well as prosecution documents. Therefore, the said argument by the defence counsel is rejected.
  17. On the overall perusal of document and evidence, they are very coherent, cogent and reliable and time, date were correctly found in all those documents. Further the defence counsel could not elicit any contra evidence as against the prosecution. In our case, evidence of PW1 to PW5 and the documents filed before the court are very cogent and reliable as per NDPS Act u/s.42, 42(2) and 50(1) and 57 of the Act were promptly done and accused was found to be in possession of goods which are prohibited under NDPS Act. PW1 seized 1.000 Kg of ganja from A1/Senthil Kumar, 1.000 Kg of ganja from A2/Joseph and 1.500 Kgs of ganja from A3/Alavudeen under mahazars Ex.P.3, Ex.P.4 and Ex.P5 respectively in the presence of witnesses. As per Lab Report/Ex.P.10, all the three seized contrabands from A1 to A3 are found to be ganja. Here, the seized quantity of ganja from A1 to A3 are of intermediate quantity. A1 to A3 were found illegal possession of 1.000 Kg, 1.000 Kg and 1.500 Kg respectively and they were caught red handedly at the incident place and the contraband was also seized from them under seizure mahazars/Ex.P.3 to Ex.P.5
    in the presence of witnesses. Therefore, A1 to A3 are found guilty u/s.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act.
  18. From the evidence of PW1, PW2, PW4, PW5 and prosecution documents, it was not revealed that A1 to A3 had criminally conspired with them for transportation and selling of ganja as per the prosecution case. All the three accused persons A1 to A3 were arrested at the incident place and seized the contraband at the spot and the illegal possession of contraband was proved through the prosecution evidence and documents also, but there is no linking materials to show that A1 to A3 had criminally conspired before the relevant crime and there is no connecting evidence or documents that A1 to A3 had criminally conspired to commit the said offence. Since there is no such effective evidence and documents to substantiate the charge u/s.8(c) r/w 29(1) of NDPS Act, A1 to A3 deserve acquittal from the said charge framed against them. Therefore, A1 to A3 are found not guilty u/s.8(c) r/w 29(1) of the NDPS Act.
  19. In this case, A3 had involved illicit transportation of 1.500 Kgs of ganja through Honda Activa bearing Reg.No.TN06 9672 for the purpose of selling and the said vehicle was seized under mahazar/Ex.P.5. The vehicle was produced before this court in B.No.45/2022 and the photographs of the said vehicle is marked as Ex.P.7. The said vehicle was returned to A3/Alavudeen by this court in Crl.M.P.No.500/2022, dt.07.03.2022. The owner of the vehicle is A3/Alavudeen. Though the prosecution had not produced any document and evidence, it is clear from the documents which had been produced at the time of return of vehicle before this court that the A3/Alavudeen is the owner of the vehicle. At the relevant point of time, he was standing along with his vehicle at
    the incident place and later on the contraband was seized from him under mahazar at the spot. Therefore, A3 had used the said vehicle in this crime. Hence, the prosecution has proved the charge u/s.25 of the NDPS Act against the accused A3. Hence, the accused A3 is found guilty u/s.25 of the NDPS Act.
  20. In the result, Accused A1 and A2 are found guilty u/s.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. A3/Alavudeen is found guilty u/s.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) and 25 of the NDPS Act.
  21. With regard to the sentence to be imposed, the accused A1 to A3 were questioned. They replied as follows:
    A1. bgha; tHf;F/ Fww; thsp ,y;iy/ Fiwe;jgl;r jz;lid tH’;FkhW
    nfl;Lf; bfhs;fpnwd;/
    A2.bgha; tHf;F/ Fw;wthsp ,yi; y/ Fiwe;jgl;r jz;lid tH’;FkhW
    nflL; f; bfhs;fpnwd;/
    A3.bgha; tHf;F/ Fw;wthsp ,yi; y/ Fiwe;jgl;r jz;lid tH’;FkhW
    nflL; f; bfhs;fpnwd;/
  22. The plea of the accused are considered. The seized contraband from the accused are intermediate quantity. It causes deadly impact on the society.
  23. Accordingly accused A2 and A3 are convicted u/s.235(2) of Cr.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years each and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- each for the offence u/s.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii) (B) of the NDPS Act, and in default of payment of fine thereof to undergo further period of 6 months R.I. each and accused A3/Alavudeen is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- for the offence u/s.8(c) r/w 25 of the NDPS Act, in default of payment of fine thereof to undergo further period of 6 months R.I. The period of remand already undergone by the accused is ordered to be set off u/s 428 of Cr.P.C. The above sentences imposed on the accused/A3/Alavudeen are ordered to run concurrently. The total fine amount of A3 is Rs.1,00,000/- The total fine amount is Rs.2,00,000/-
  24. Further, A1 to A3 are found not guilty u/s.8(c) r/w 29(1) of the NDPS Act and A1 and A2 are also found not guilty u/s.8(c) r/w 25 of the NDPS Act and they are acquitted from the said charges.
  25. Property order: M.O.1 to M.O.9 (in A.No.117/2022, dt.25.02.2022), which are samples and remaining bulk contrabands are available in this case and the same are ordered to hand over the destruction committed for disposal after the appeal period and if any appeal is preferred, after the disposal of said appeal. The Honda Activa Two wheeler bearing Reg.No.TN06 9672 (B.No.45/2022, dt.25.02.2022) was returned to the A3/Alavudeen for interim custody vide.by this court in
    Crl.M.P.No.500/2022, dt.07.03.2022.
    //Dictated by me, typed by Steno – typist directly in the system, corrected and pronounced by me in open court, this the 06th day of August, 2024.//

PRINCIPAL SPECIAL JUDGE,
SPECIAL COURT UNDER EC & NDPS ACT,
CHENNAI-104. L.B.

You may also like...