Karnataka High Court
Reubi Walter vs Superintendent Of Customs on 4 January, 2017
Author: Anand Byrareddy
Bench: Anand Byrareddy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF JANUARY, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2185 OF 2016
Between:
Reubi Walter,
S/o Relubi Walter,
Major, Aged about 57 years,
Resident of Rebstockweg,
39 32 32 ins,
Switzerland. ...Appellant
(By Shri. Hashmath Pasha, Advocate)
And:
Superintendent of Customs,
Air Intelligence Unit,
Bangalore - 560 300.
(Represented by learned
Special Public Prosecutor) ...Respondent
(By Shri. K.N. Mohan, Advocate)
---
This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of
Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment and order dated
30.10.2013 and sentence dated 05.11.2013 passed by the
2
XXXIII Addl. C.C. and S.J. and Spl. Judge (NDPS),
Bangalore in Spl.C.C.No.136/2010 - convicting the
appellant/accused for the offence P/U/S 21(C) and 28 of
N.D.P.S. Act.
This Appeal coming on for orders this day, the Court
delivered the following:-
JUDGMENT
There is a delay of 1088 days in filing the appeal. For the reasons assigned the delay is condoned. The appellant has sought suspension of sentence and bail. Incidentally it is pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant that this appellant who was one of the accused along with two others whose appeals have been entertained by this Court and have been allowed and they have been acquitted. It is the very evidence that is ranged against this appellant that the prosecution would seek to rely upon in so far as the present appellant is concerned and since that has been considered at length by this Court and it is after analysis of the evidence and reasoning of the court below that the impugned judgment has been set aside. The benefit of the 3 said judgment would extend to this appellant as well and therefore would submit that the appeal itself be allowed at this stage.
The learned counsel for the respondent however would seek to raise objection as regards the inordinate delay in filing the appeal and would submit that the judgment of this Court is not final and hence the benefit being extended to the present appellant may be premature. In so far as the present appellant's case was concerned, that the trial court has rendered an independent judgment. The evidence and findings are identical as all the three accused including the present appellant were accused of carrying narcotic substance and were intercepted on their way out of India at the airport and it is on the common evidence that was gathered against the appellant separate case was registered against the accused. In view of this Court having acquitted the other accused who stood on the same footing as the present appellant, the present appeal is 4 allowed and disposed of in terms of the judgment of this Court in Crl.A. No.508/2014 c/w Crl.A. No.308/2014 dated 16.12.2016. The appellant shall be set at liberty forthwith. The judgment of the court below in Spl.C.C. No.136/2010 on the file the XXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for N.D.P.S. Cases (CCH-33), Bangalore, is set aside. The appellant is acquitted. A copy of this order shall be communicated to the jail authorities for immediate compliance. It is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that his passport has been impounded. The passport to be released in his favour.
Sd/-
JUDGE ykl