Retracted confession and corroborated recovery can sustain NDPS conviction; acquittal interfered with on perverse appreciation of evidence.

A retracted confession may support conviction when it is voluntary and corroborated by surrounding circumstances and recovered materials. On the facts, the court found that the first accused's export consignment concealed ganja in Senna bales, the foreign seizure was supported by subsequent investigation, and the trial court had wrongly discarded material evidence; the acquittal of the first accused was therefore set aside and NDPS conviction affirmed. As to the second accused, the evidence only showed typist-level involvement and did not establish conscious knowledge of concealment, so acquittal was confirmed. The trial judge who originally heard the case was held competent to complete the sentencing stage after remand.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the acquittal of the first accused was liable to be set aside on the basis of the recovery, documentary evidence, and the confessional statements recorded during investigation. (ii) Whether the acquittal of the second accused was liable to be interfered with, and whether the Principal District Judge retained jurisdiction to complete the sentencing stage after the matter was remitted.

Issue (i): Whether the acquittal of the first accused was liable to be set aside on the basis of the recovery, documentary evidence, and the confessional statements recorded during investigation.

Analysis: The materials showed that the consignment exported by the first accused contained ganja concealed in Senna bales and that the seizure by the foreign customs authorities was corroborated by the subsequent investigation. The confessional statement of the first accused, though retracted later, was treated as voluntary and was supported by surrounding circumstances and other recovered materials. The Court held that the trial court had discarded relevant evidence on untenable grounds, including the non-examination of packers and the alleged inadmissibility of the confessions. The statutory burden under the NDPS law was also found not to have been discharged by the first accused.

Conclusion: The acquittal of the first accused was set aside and conviction under the NDPS provisions was affirmed.

Issue (ii): Whether the acquittal of the second accused was liable to be interfered with, and whether the Principal District Judge retained jurisdiction to complete the sentencing stage after the matter was remitted.

Analysis: The material against the second accused showed only that he acted as a typist and did not sufficiently establish conscious knowledge of the concealment of ganja so as to sustain conviction. On the later procedural question, the Court held that the trial judge who had originally tried the case retained jurisdiction to hear the accused on sentence and pass appropriate orders, and no transfer of the records to another court was necessary.

Conclusion: The acquittal of the second accused was confirmed, and the original trial judge was held competent to proceed with sentencing.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only in part, resulting in conviction of the first accused alone while the acquittal of the second accused stood confirmed, and the sentencing stage was to proceed before the original trial court.

Ratio Decidendi: A retracted confession can sustain conviction when it is voluntary and corroborated by independent surrounding circumstances and recovered materials, and appellate interference with an acquittal is justified where the trial court's view is perverse and ignores material evidence.

---