Law: Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997

Section: 9(c)

Law: Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001

Section: Rr.4,5

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 156

(a) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997)--- ----S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---Prosecution case was that a sack containing fifty packets of charas weighing fifty kilograms was recovered from the diggy of the vehicle driven by accused, while co-accused persons were sitting on rear seat of the vehicle---Complainant (Investigating Officer) sealed the recovered charas in the same sack at the spot and arrested the accused---Prosecution, in order to bring home guilt of the accused persons, had examined complainant and recovery witness---Complainant and recovery witness both had fully supported the prosecution case---Said witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination but nothing came on record to discredit their evidence---Said witnesses were unanimous on all material aspects of the case---No discrepancy or material contradiction was found in their evidence---Investigating Officer had sent entire charas to the Chemical Examiner for analysis without loss of time---Evidence of Excise Officials was fully supported by positive chemical report---Plea that huge quantity of fifty kilograms charas had been foisted had no justification---Evidence of prosecution witnesses was quite reliable, trustworthy and confidence inspiring---Objection of defence that there were material contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution had no force as the courts were supposed to dispose of the matter with dynamic approach, instead of acquitting the drug paddlers on technicalities---In the present case, presence of accused being a driver in the car was not denied and it had been established by cogent evidence---Driver of the vehicle invariably raised the plea that he had no knowledge when narcotics or other contraband items were recovered from the vehicle, but depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case, contention of the defence was found without merit---Driver could not be absolved from the responsibility---Evidence showed that co-accused persons were sitting on the rear seat of the car and it was not a passenger bus---Co-accused persons had not raised the plea that they had hired the said car as taxi, as such they were…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492