1991 (11) TMI 152

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sp;The appellant challenges his 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 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eted, tried, convicted and sentenced 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 pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....law designed to eliminate the possibility 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 informa....