Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. Sri D.P. Mourya Sub-Inspector of Police, RPF attached to New Jalpaiguri Railway Station who is P.W.1 in the case says that he got a source information that a person was travelling on 2.2.04 in 2423 Dn. Rajdhani Express from New Bongaigaon to New Delhi in AC coach No. 2 (A/2) in berth No. 9 with contraband articles in his possession and passed the information to his superior officer in the RPF at NJP wherefrom the said superior officer directed him to the platform so as to take permission from the OC, NJP, GRPS as the train was arriving at platform No. 1 at NJP Railway Station. He then approached the OC, GRPS at NJP Railway Station who told him that ASI Asok Tewari and constable ASI Santa Kumar Subba who were in the said platform already on duty be requsted to render necessary assistance to him. Then he went to the RPF booth on the said platform where he found head constable R.P. Singh and constable Shyamal Das and asked them to accompany him for the operation in Dn. Rajdhani Express. After watching glow sign board of the platform No. 1 so as to ascertain the position of the coach No. A/2 he positioned himself near about the place where coach No. A/2 would halt and just after the train had reached he boarded the compartment with ASI Asok Kumar Tewari and ASI Santa Kumar Subba and found one person seated on berth No. 9 (lower berth) which tallied with his information. On interrogation the person, now the appellant, replied that he was a student going to New Delhi and the luggages attached to the berth contained books only. Following interrogation a member of staff found on search a pink colour wrapped paper containing ganja in one suit case. Immediately, the appellant was deboarded with four number of luggages. Then he came to the GRPS along with the appellant and the luggages. OC, NJP, GRPS, R. Lama Bhutia also arrived at the platform and to him Sri Mourya narrated the incident. The OC, NJP, GRPS passed the information to his superior officer and told him that the property would be seized only in presence of the said superior officer. 2/3 hours thereafter the Inspector of RPF, an officer superior to the OC, NJP, GRPS arrived there followed by other persons. Then Sri Mourya lodged the FIR with OC, NJP, GRPS on production of the accused and two suitcases and two side bags which were found in his possession.

6. The OC, NJP, GRPS Sri R. Lama Bhutia (P.W.2) says that on being produced before him by P.W. 1 along with the FIR he seized two suitcases and two side bags from the possession of the accused containing ganja weighing about 90 kgs. as per seizure list (Ext. 2). The seizure list reveals two suitcases-- one containing 35 kgs. of ganja (Mat. Ext. I) and the other containing 27 kgs. of ganja (Mat. Ext. II) and the two side bags-one containing 15 kgs. (Mat. Ext. V) and the other containing 13 kgs. of ganja (Mat. Ext. VI)--thus totaling 90 kgs. in four containers. The seizure was made in presence of P.W.1, P.W.6, the Inspector of Police and other staff. He seized also a cash of Rs. 3,300/- (Mat. Ext. IX), ticket of Rajdhani Express (Ext. 3) and a mobile phone (Mat. Ext. VII) from the appellant. From each of the four containers namely Mat. Ext. I, II, V and VI he obtained 50 gms. of ganja as sample under a separate seizure list (Ext. 5) in presence of witnesses and endorsed the case to S.I. Khalil Bhutia (P.W.9) for investigation. This witness said that at 13.15 hrs. P.W.1 gave him the information that he had an information about arrival of some contraband articles in Rajdhani Express and sought for his assistance and he accordingly directed ASI Asok Kumar Tewari and Santa Kumar Subba to assist P.W.1, P.W.3 Asok Kumar Tewari, ASI of Police corroborated the entire version of P.W.1 and P.W.2, saying that he along with P.W.1 entered into the coach at berth No. 9 and P.W.1 interrogated the person who was seated in that berth and on interrogation he disclosed his identity as a student carrying books in the containers which were two VIP suitcases and two side bags. RPF personnel got smell of ganja in the container and then the person was taken out of the train and taken to NJP, GRPS P.W.4 Santa Kumar Subba, another ASI of Police then attached to NJP, GRPS said that as directed by the OC, NJP, GRPS he along with P.W.3 boarded the compartment and found a person seated:in berth No. 9 and on interrogation he introduced himself to be a student carrying books in two suitcases and two bags but on opening a bag the RPF personnel found smell of ganja. Then the person was handed over to the OC, NJP, GRPS, Now in evidence-in-chief the witness says that person was not found in Court. P.W.7, Shyamal Kumar Das, constable of the RPF said that P.W.1 detected two VIP suitcases and two bags in berth No. 9 and the boy along with luggages was taken out from the train and handed over to the GRPS.

10. Mr. Basu argued that the appellant was not travelling in 2123 Dn. Rajdhani Express and he was travelling in another train and at about evening which was long after Rajdhani Express had departed from NJP Railway Station that the appellant was arrested at the platform. It is further argued that to substantiate his case he wanted to adduce evidence but he was denied the opportunity. Mr. Goswnmi learned Advocate for State respondent opposed the argument submitting that having gone through evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 as also P.W.3 and P.W.4 it cannot be said that the appellant was travelling in a different train. We have heard the submissions of the learned Counsels but are unable to agree with Mr. Basu. Whether the appellant was denied the opportunity to adduce evidence in support of his alleged defence will be separately dealt with but regard being had to evidence on record it cannot be said that the appellant was travelling in a different train. Ext. 3 is the ticket bearing PNR No. 623-5958652 seized from the possession of the appellant showing the journey of the appellant from New Bongaigaon to New Delhi in AC-II, berth No. 9 by 2423 Dn. Guwahati-Rajdhani Express. The appellant from whom a driving licence was seized (Mat. Ext. VIII) is a resident of Baburhat, Nilkuthi of the district Cooch Behar. As corroborated by P.W.3. P.W.4, P.W.7, it has been clearly established beyond any amount of reasonable doubt that it was the appellant who was travelling in berth No. 9 in AC-II coach in 2423 Dn. Rajdhani Express from New Bongaigaon to New Delhi with two suitcases and two side bags containing 90 kgs. of ganja and was apprehended by P. W. 1 in the said train being assisted by P.W.3 and P.W.4 with the said contraband articles and thereafter he was deboarded and taken to OC, NJP, GRPS wherein seizure was effected. The accused was apprehended in Rajdhani Express at 13.15 hrs. on 2.2.04 when the train had reached NJP Railway Station and formally seizure was effected as per seizure list at 18.15 hrs. and the time gap between the apprehension of the accused and preparation of the seizure list has been accounted for by P.W.1 with the words that 2/3 hours were spent to wait for arrival of the superior of the OC, NJP, GRPS who is P.W.6 the Inspector of Police and who signed on the two seizure lists as witnesses to the seizure and who identified before the Trial Court the four Mat. Exts. Namely I, II, V and VI. It is for the first time in examination of the appellant under Section 313, Cr PC that the appellant told the learned Court that he was returning by Kanchanjangha. This line of defence was not taken in cross-examination of the witnesses and we have no manner doubt to hold that this was a false plea made by the appellant. If he was travelling in Kanchanjangha Express on 2.2.04 he could have produced that ticket. That the railway ticket (Ext. 3) the description of which has been stated above was found from the possession of the accused and that the ticket tallied with his journey from New Bongaigaon to New Delhi could not be dislodged by any amount of logic, and it is not the defence case that the ticket was found from the possession of some other passenger with the accused having been falsely planted in the case. That the name of the appellant was Sukanta Ghosh alias Bapi has not been challenged and if it was the positive defence case that the appellant did not travel in that train with contraband articles in four containers with the ticket allegedly found in his possession and he was instead travelling by Kanchanjangha Express then it could have been agitated by production of Kanchanjangha ticket that the ticket which has been seized was not purchased in the name of the appellant. However the statement of the appellant under Section 313, Cr. PC corroborated the evidence of P.W. 1, 2, 6 and other witnesses to the effect that he was caught red handed with possession of contraband articles at NJP Railway Station. The witnesses who deposed in the case were Sub-Inspector of RPF, OC, NJP, GRPS and Inspector of Police who were all responsible officers having no animosity with the appellant who was only a traveller in the train and as such it can hardly be said that the appellant has been falsely implicated. The appellant said in his examination under Section 313, Cr. PC that he was conspired against. If it was so he was so conspired against by person or persons known to his circle and not by P.W.1 and other witnesses.

12. Mr. Basu wanted us to disbelieve evidence of P. Ws. 1 and 2 with respect to the alleged seizure of the 90 kgs. of ganja from the possession of the appellant in side the compartment of the train as according to him his client was debarred from giving evidence to the effect that he was not travelling in the Dn. 2423 Rajdhani Express but in a different train and the alleged source information received by P.W.1 is a myth. Mr. Goswami learned Advocate for the State respondent seriously challenged this argument on the ground that evidence clearly discloses seizure of 90 kgs. of ganja from the four containers while the accused was seated in berth No. 9 of AC-2 coach of the said Rajdhani Express. Having gone through evidence of the witnesses we are unable to accept the submission of Mr. Basu. What we find from evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.6 and other witnesses who supported the three witnesses are that P.W.1 had secret information that a person carrying contraband articles was proceeding towards New Delhi by AC-2 coach in berth No. 9 in 2423 Dn. Rajdhani Express. He left that information with his superior officer and then being directed by him he came to the platform and informed P.W. 2, the OC. NJP, GRPS of the matter and being assisted by P.W.3 and P.W.4 he apprehended the appellant who was found sealed in berth No. 9 of the AC-U coach of the said train and found two suitcases and two side bags in the possession of the appellant who first introduced himself to be a student carrying books in the bags to New Delhi and when one of the RPF personnel found on opening of a bag ganja he divulged that he was entrusted to deliver ganja to Delhi. He was then deboarded and taken to P.W. 2 who found following: