TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 949
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act'). 3. On 4th March 2016, PW-5, Sub-Inspector Bhawna Tiwari, who was posted at the relevant time in Hanumantal Police Station, Jabalpur, received an information that some persons, including three men and two women, were carrying Ganja in a WagonR car and were trying to sell the contraband. Accordingly, necessary preparation was made by PW-5. When PW-5 and her team reached Footalal Ground, Hanumanatal, they found that three men and two women were sitting in a WagonR. The women were Seema and Preeti. On search, bags containing Ganja, totally weighing 38.200 kgs. were seized. Samples were drawn, and further procedure was followed. The accused were arrested. In the memo of a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d and that one Seema Choudhari was the real accused cannot be discarded. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence adduced by the prosecution to show that Seema Choudhari and the present appellant are one and the same, the conviction of the appellant cannot be sustained. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the State invited our attention to statements recorded by the police and findings in the order dated 6th September 2016. He submitted that the findings are based on documents such as the Aadhar card. He submitted that the said order was not challenged by the appellant and hence, has become final. CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS 7. The burden was on the prosecution to prove that the present appellant was found sitting in a WagonR car on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as Seema Choudhari; e. The arrest memo records her age as 17 years. Therefore, she was produced before the Juvenile Justice Board, Jabalpur. By a communication dated 14th March 2016, the Juvenile Justice Board informed the Superintendent of the Children's Home that the age of Seema Choudhari appears to be more than 18 years; f. In the remand report, the name of Seema Choudhari appears; and g. In none of the documents, produced along with the charge sheet, K. Shikha Barman was mentioned as an accused; 9. Now, we turn to the evidence of PW-5. The evidence of PW-5 reveals the following factual aspects : a. On 4th March 2016, PW-5 found five persons sitting in a WagonR car. Three were men and two were women whose names were Seema and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as not recorded in the Roznamcha Sanha. 50. It is correct that after reaching to the spot of incident and while preparing the Search Panchnama Ex.P- 4, no woman named Shikha Barman was found in the vehicle. I am not aware that consent of a minor is not taken. It is incorrect to say that age of Pappu Chakrawarti at the time of incident was 15 years it is correct that signature of Shikha Barman is not present on any Panchnama prepared on the spot. Thumb impression which is on the consent Panchnama and other Panchnama is not of Shikha Barman. It is correct on the front page of Ex.P- 4,5,7,8,9,10,12,13,14,15,16,17 and Ex.P-24 signature or thumb impression of any witness or accused is not present. ( underlines supplied ) e. Even in para....