Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and order dated 3rd May 2000 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Satara in Sessions Case No. 94 of 1998, whereby the respondent/accused Kondiba Bahiru Thambare was acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 8(b) read with Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). The prosecution case was that on 25th February 1997, a raiding party comprising Deputy Superintendent V.H. Jadhav (PW-4), Excise Sub-Inspector B.V. Dhavale (PW-5), panch witnesses, and constables went to village Bavdhan and raided the field of the accused bearing Gat No. 211. They allegedly found the accused growing 400 opium poppy plants in his field where wheat crop was standing. The plants were uprooted, and two samples along with earth samples were taken under a panchnama. A crime was registered, and after investigation, the accused was chargesheeted. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed false implication. The trial court acquitted the accused, primarily on the ground that the mandatory sampling procedure under Standing Order 1/89 was not followed. The High Court, after hearing the learned APP for the State and the learned counsel for the accused, upheld the acquittal. The court observed that the prosecution failed to prove that the samples taken were representative of the entire lot of 400 plants, and that the non-compliance with the Standing Order created a reasonable doubt. The court also noted that the trial court's findings were plausible and not perverse, and that the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused was strengthened by the acquittal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 8(b) r/w Section 18 - Cultivation of Opium Poppy - Sampling Procedure - The prosecution alleged that the accused was found cultivating 400 opium poppy plants in his field. The trial court acquitted the accused on the ground that the mandatory sampling procedure under Standing Order 1/89 was not followed. The High Court upheld the acquittal, holding that the prosecution failed to prove that the samples taken were representative of the entire lot, and that the non-compliance with the Standing Order created a reasonable doubt in the prosecution case. (Paras 1-10) B) Evidence Law - Burden of Proof - Presumption of Innocence - Acquittal - The High Court reiterated that the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is strengthened by an acquittal, and the appellate court should not interfere unless the findings are perverse or unreasonable. The court found that the trial court's appreciation of evidence was plausible and not perverse. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was cultivating opium poppy plants in his field, and whether the mandatory sampling procedure under Standing Order 1/89 was complied with.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed; acquittal of accused upheld.
Law Points
- Sampling procedure under NDPS Act
- Standing Order 1/89
- Representative sample
- Burden of proof on prosecution
- Acquittal upheld
