Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: paracetamol in State vs . Md. Ashraf 272/11 1 Of31 on 17 January, 2014Matching Fragments
7. On the other hand counsel for accused argued that despite availability, no public witness was joined. FSL form was not filled up at the spot and so there arises no question of sending of FSL form to the laboratory. Also there is a delay of 18 days in sending the sample to the lab. Counsel raised doubt about deposit of case property with the MHC(M) by the SHO. He submitted that a small quantity of smack was recovered from his client but it was mixed with paracetamol in order to make it a commercial quantity State vs. Md. Ashraf 272/11 13 of31 and that is why there is a change of colour of the case property. He argued that it is the case of the prosecution that subsequent investigation was done by ASI Devender Singh but there is nothing on the file to suggest by whom he was appointed as the second IO. He assailed the offer of search of the accused in the presence of GO or Magistrate.
13. Defence counsel further argued that heroin in small quantity was seized from the accused but in order to make a commercial recovery, the recovered contraband was mixed with paracetamol and in this regard he heavily relied upon FSL report Ex.PX in which it has been opined that sample parcel A was found containing diacetylmorphine and acetaminophen. PW11 deposed in crossÂexamination that acetaminophen is the chemical name of State vs. Md. Ashraf 272/11 21 of31 paracetamol. Counsel next referred to the testimony of PW10 at page no.3 and 4 of crossÂexamination wherein he deposed that he understood paracetamol. He next deposed that he was not knowing about paracetamol powder and only knew about paracetamol tablet.
Even if it is presumed that PW10 was knowing about the paracetamol powder, there is nothing on the record to suggest that that powder was mixed with the recovered smack in order to make it commercial quantity. Moreover it has been clarified by PW10 himself that he was not knowing about any paracetamol powder but he knew about paracetamol tablet. Knowledge of paracetamol tablet is not obnoxious to the prosecution case because such kinds of tablets are used by the people of this country at large without prescription and so knowledge of that tablet to PW10 is justified.