Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State vs Shambhulal & Anr on 1 August, 2017
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Crml Leave To Appeal No. 347 / 2015
State of Rajasthan
----Appellant
Versus
1. Shambhulal S/o Nandlal Dhakad, R/o Amarpura, P.S. Begun,
District Chittorgarh (Raj.)
2. Kedar Jat S/o Chhotu Jat, R/o Indoli, P.S. Arai, District Ajmer.
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Appellant(s) : Mr.L.R.Upadhyay, P.P.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vineet Jain, Mr.Abhishek Charan.
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order 01/08/2017 Heard learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the accused.
By way of this application preferred under Section 378(iii) &
(i) Cr.P.C., the State of Rajasthan craves leave to file an appeal against the judgment dated 25.8.2015 passed by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act Cases, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No.10/2014 whereby, the respondent Shambhulal was acquitted from the charge under Sections 8/18 and 8/25 of N.D.P.S. Act and the respondent Kedar Jat was acquitted from the charge under Section 8/15 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
I have perused the impugned judgment and the record. The prosecution case as set out in the F.I.R. lodged by Chena Ram Choudhary S.H.O. P.S. Rayala on 24.8.2013 was that he (2 of 3) [CRLLA-347/2015] recovered contraband poppy straw weighing 520 kgs. 950 gms. from an unnumbered Tata Dicor ACE vehicle lying in an abandoned condition on the Lambiya cross roads, Bhilwara. The respondent Shambhulal was arrayed as an accused on the basis of certain delivery receipts/bills portraying that the vehicle was purchased by him whereas, the respondent Kedar Jat was arrayed as an accused on the basis of the information supplied by Shambhulal to the Investigating Officer under Section 27 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
The trial court discarded the receipts Ex.P14 and P.15 procured by the Investigating Officer on the ground that the same were not filed alongwith the charge-sheet and rather were presented through a belated application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. Further, the witness Gautam Jain P.W.4, who proved the documents/receipts claiming to be the business manager of C.K.Motors, Chittorgarh admitted that the receipts had not been issued by him personally but were issued by some Branch Manager. The said Branch Manager was not examined as a witness on behalf of the prosecution. Gautam Jain further admitted that no identification documents of the person, who had purchased the vehicle and taken the delivery thereof were available on the company's record. It is further relevant to mention here that even if the accused Shambhulal was assumed to be the owner of the offending vehicle, then to, the prosecution was required to lead positive evidence to prove that he was having conscious knowledge about the poppy straw being transported therein. The notice given to the accused Shambhulal under Section 133A of the Motor Vehicles Act and the reply thereof was discarded by the trial (3 of 3) [CRLLA-347/2015] court and rightly so because the same was given after his arrest.
In view of these facts, I am of the firm opinion that the trial court committed no error or illegality while acquitting the accused from the charges because the prosecution failed to lead any cogent and plausible evidence to connect them with the alleged crime. Thus, I am not inclined to grant leave to the State of Rajasthan to file an appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 25.8.2015 passed by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act Cases, Bhilwara.
Consequently, the instant application for leave to appeal is dismissed as being devoid of merit.
Record be returned to the trial court forthwith.
(SANDEEP MEHTA)J. /tarun goyal/