The High Court dismissed the criminal appeal filed by the appellant convicted for transporting ganja. The court reaffirmed the trial court's finding of guilt based on the evidence and rejected the appeal without specific merit arguments.
The criminal appeal was dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/16TH KARTHIKA, 1935
CRL.A.No. 348 of 2002 ( )
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 228/1999 of II ADDL.D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,PALAKKAD DATED 11-04-2002
APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
KUTTAPPAN, S/O.CHATHAKUTTY, AGED 34 YEARS, CHITTILANGAD PARAMBU VEEDU, PERUMANNUR KARIMBA, CHALISSERY.
BY ADV. SRI.GEO PAUL
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDDENT OF POLICE SHORANUR-REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.N.SURESH
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
mns
V.K.MOHANAN, J.
Crl.A.No.348 of 2002
Dated this the 7th day of November, 2013
JUDGMENT
The above appeal is directed against the judgment dated
11.04.2002 in S.C.No.228 of 1999 of the court of IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Palakkad, at the instance of the sole accused in the above Sessions case as he is convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 20(b) (1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
2
Crl.A.No.348 of 2002
registered in the Mannarkkad police station. On completing investigation, charge was laid in the Sessions Court, Palakkad wherein S.C.No.228 of 1999 was instituted and the same made over to the present trial court for disposal.
3
Crl.A.No.348 of 2002
Crl.A.No.348 of 2002 4
seat of the said bus holding a bag which he doubted as containing ganja as he smelled the same. Thus according to the prosecution, on getting such information, PW1 after informing the matter to Dy.S.P. and entering the matter in General Diary and waited in front of the Mannarkkad police station with his party and when the said bus arrived in front of the Mannarkkad police station, the bus was stopped and the accused was identified and he was brought down and, thereafter, the ganja was searched out in the presence of Divisional Forest Officer, who is a Gazetted Officer and ganja was seized from the bag carried by the accused. The total quantity of the ganja was found as 1.600 kgs and out of this, three samples, each sample containing 50 grams were separated and samples were packed in polythene cover and properly sealed and the residue weighing 1.450 kgs was also separately packed, tied with twine and sealed properly. The label containing the signatures of the accused, PW1 the detecting officer, PW4 and PW5 (Conductor) was also affixed on both packets. The entire proceedings including the seizure sampling etc are elaborately described in the seizure mahazar, Ext.P1. Thereafter, a crime was registered in the Mannarkkad
5
Crl.A.No.348 of 2002
police station and, thereafter, the accused was produced before the court as well as the contraband articles and also the other material objects were produced. The investigation was undertaken by PW7, the then DYSP.
also deposed in tune with the deposition of PW1. The role of PW3 I have already mentioned. PW4 is the then Divisional Forest Officer who is a Gazetted Officer at whose presence the
6
Crl.A.No.348 of 2002
seizure was effected. PW4 has also deposed that on getting letter from PW1 requesting him to his presence for search of bag held by a passenger in the above mentioned bus, he reached at police station at about 8.40 am and he had also deposed the procedures adopted by PW1 towards the search and seizure of ganja from the possession of the accused. He had also admitted his signature on the sample packet and the residue packet and also Ext.P1 seizure mahazar and during trial he had identified MO2 material objects and Ext.P1 seizure mahazar. PW5 the conductor of the said bus when examined, he had also deposed in favour of the prosecution and he had also identified MO1 series, 2 sample packets and residue as MO2 and also identified MO3 plastic cover. The evidence of PW7, the investigating officer shows that the samples were sent for chemical analysis report and thus obtained Ext.P7 chemical analysis report. These are the evidence and materials referred to by the learned judge in support of his finding. On re-appreciation of the evidence and on materials, I am of the view that the learned Judge of the trial court is fully justified in its finding and convicting the appellant especially when no argument is advanced on merit.
7
Crl.A.No.348 of 2002
In the result, I find no reason to interfere with the finding of the court below and accordingly, this appeal is dismissed confirming the conviction recorded by the trial court against the appellant for the offence under Section 20 (b) (1) of the N.D.P.S Act and the sentence imposed thereunder, as per the judgment dated 11.04.2002 in SC.228/1999 of the court of IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Palakkad.
Accordingly, the above appeal is dismissed.
V.K.MOHANAN JUDGE
mns
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court under Section 20(b)(1) of the N.D.P.S Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kuttappan
State of Kerala
V.K. Mohanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
