TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (11) TMI 152
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is conviction u/s 20/22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter the 'Act') and sentence of 10 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1 lac awarded by second Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, vide judgment dated 25-3-1991 passed in Sessions Trial No. 71 of 1990. 2. The appellant runs a Dhaba at the outskirt of village Chirchari, which is under the jurisdiction of polic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enced as aforesaid. 3. The defence is that nothing was recovered from the possession of the appellant. The Police Inspectors wanted the appellant to pay them money. He was not prepared to oblige and therefore this concocted case was foisted on him. 4. Independent witness Fakir did not support the prosecution. Another such witness Poonaram was given up by the prosecution on the ground that he was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lity of false implication of the accused was not followed. It was then argued that u/s 50 of the Act, it was obligatory for the police officer who conducted the search to have informed the appellant of his right to opt for his search being taken in presence of a gazetted officer or a magistrate. From the evidence of prosecution, it is clear that no such information was given to the appellant and t....