Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the acquittal of respondents Niranjan Jadhav, Amarasaha Laljisaha, and Shaikh Usman Kadar (respondent No.3 Pranabkumar Chakrawarti died and appeal abated) by the Sessions Court for offences under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The prosecution case was that on 28th March 1999, police intercepted a Maruti car near Bidkin, Aurangabad, driven by respondent No.1, with respondents No.2, 3, and 4 as passengers. From a bag kept in the car, police recovered 5 kg of ganja. The trial court acquitted all accused, holding that the prosecution failed to prove conscious possession. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence of seizure witnesses and panchas, and found it consistent and credible. The court applied the presumptions under Sections 35 and 54 of the NDPS Act, which raise a presumption of culpable mental state and possession, and held that the respondents failed to rebut these presumptions. The court concluded that the trial court's acquittal was perverse and set it aside, convicting the respondents under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) and sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.1,00,000 each, with default sentence of 2 years. The court directed the respondents to surrender within 15 days to serve the sentence.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 20(b)(ii)(B) - Conscious Possession - The issue was whether the respondents were in conscious possession of ganja recovered from a bag kept in the car. The court held that the prosecution established conscious possession as the bag was in the car driven by respondent No.1 and the other respondents were co-passengers with knowledge, relying on Section 35 and Section 54 of the NDPS Act which raise presumptions of culpable mental state and possession. (Paras 1-20) B) Criminal Law - Appeal against Acquittal - Perversity - The court considered whether the trial court's acquittal was perverse. Held that the trial court's finding that the prosecution failed to prove possession was erroneous as the evidence of seizure witnesses and panchas was consistent and credible, and the acquittal was set aside. (Paras 1-20) C) Criminal Law - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 35 - Presumption of Culpable Mental State - The court applied the presumption that the accused had a culpable mental state, which they failed to rebut. (Para 15) D) Criminal Law - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 54 - Presumption of Possession - The court held that once possession is established, the burden shifts to the accused to explain, which they did not. (Para 15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the respondents were in conscious possession of ganja and whether the acquittal by the trial court was perverse.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment of acquittal passed by the Sessions Court is set aside. The respondents are convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.1,00,000 each, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 2 years. The respondents are directed to surrender within 15 days to serve the sentence.
Law Points
- conscious possession
- burden of proof
- reversal of acquittal
- NDPS Act
- Section 20(b)(ii)(B)
- Section 35
- Section 54
- presumption of possession
- recovery from bag
- common intention
