TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 56
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... gathered by Shri Diwakar Joshi, (PW1), an Intelligence Officer of Directorate of Revenue (DRI), through a reliable source that the Respondent, carrying narcotic drugs, would be coming in a Bolero Jeep at HP Petrol Pump, Mahipal Pur, near Radisson Hotel, New Delhi, at around 10.00 p.m. The intelligence was reduced to writing, placed before the senior officer Shri Sanjay Bansal (PW2), who directed Shri N.D. Azad (PW9) to immediately organise a team for surveillance and interception of the person along with the contraband substance. 3. After associating two public witnesses, the DRI officers are stated to have left their office at 8.00 p.m. and reached the petrol pump at about 9.00 p.m. At around 10.30 p.m., the Bolero jeep arrived at the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under Section 67 of the NDPS Act (PW11/C), the accused appeared and tendered his voluntary statement (PW11/D). He disclosed that the owner of a stand at Jalandhar used to send the vehicle on hire to one Bittoo. On 6th October 2007, Bittoo called the Respondent at around 1.00 p.m. at BMC Chowk, Jalandhar and had given him the VIP suit case in question and Rs. 2 lakhs and asked him to go to Delhi and deliver it near the Radisson Hotel. The accused was promised to be paid Rs. 6,000/- as charges for the delivery and Rs. 500 for the payment of toll. From the sum of Rs. 2 lakhs, he spent Rs. 2000/- on diesel. However, the Respondent did not give the DRI Officers any contact number or address of Bittoo. 6. In the impugned judgment after discuss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o its genuineness. v. The failure to associate public witnesses in the search and seizure raised sufficient doubts as to their genuineness; there were also doubts regarding the site plan; the issuance of the seal of DRI by PW10 in favour of PW11 and the very constitution of the raiding team. vi. The failure to produce the necessary certification regarding the mobile phone recovered from the Respondent also contributed to the weakening of the prosecution case against the Respondent. vii. The accused could not be found guilty under Sections 27 and 27 A of the NDPS Act merely because of the recovery of cash of Rs. 1.98 lakhs. 7. Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Senior Standing Counsel for DRI submitted that since the recovery was made from th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....visions of Sections 41 and 42 of the NDPS Act, the submission of Mr. Aggarwala is that since the seizure was effected from a vehicle in transit in a public place, Section 43 of the Act that would at best apply and not Sections 41 and 42. As pointed out by the learned trial court, since the interception took place upon receipt of specific intelligence and not by way of chance recovery and by assembling a team of officers, it was a mandatory requirement to comply with Sections 41 and 42 of the NDPS Act. The reliance placed in this regard by Mr. Aggarwala on the decisions in Ramesh Kumar Rajput v. State 11 (2008) DLT (Crl) 828 and Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Mohammad Nisar Holia (2008) 2 SCC 370 is to no avail since both the decisio....