The Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State ... vs Mohd. Ismail And Anr. on 18 October, 1996
12. Secondly, even the alleged admission made by PW-3 i.e. SI
Manoj Kumar in his cross examination i.e. he was not authorized
officer under NDPS Act on the date of registration of FIR in
question is also not of much significance. It is settled proposition
of law that while evaluating/appreciating testimony of a witness
the testimony as a whole is to be read and appreciated. Perusal of
testimony of PW-3 clearly shows that in his examination in chief
PW-3 has categorically reiterated the aforesaid facts and stated
that ACP of Narcotics Cell Sh Ravinder Kumar Tyagi directed for
necessary proceedings. PW-4 i.e. ACP Ravinder Kumar Tyagi
also corroborated the said facts in his testimony recorded in
SC No.84/2015 FIR No. 87/2015 State Vs Mohd Israil & Anr. Pages 12/36
court. Even PW-10 i.e. Inspector Kuldip Singh has corroborated
the same. It is reiterated that PW-4 i.e. ACP Ravinder Kumar
Tyagi was an empowered officer under Section 41(2) of NDPS
Act and on being informed about secret information, PW-4
directed that necessary proceedings be conducted. This direction
was conveyed by PW-10 i.e. Inspector Kuldip Singh to PW-3 i.e.
SI Manoj Kumar and on receipt of said direction PW-3 i.e. SI
Manoj Kumar conducted further proceedings. Hence, PW-3 was
authorized by an Empowered Officer. The aforesaid facts have
been duly proved on record by prosecution and prosecution has
successfully proved that PW-3 i.e. SI Manoj Kumar was an
authorized officer at the relevant time. The alleged admission of
PW-3 is of no consequence in view of facts proved by
prosecution on record during trial of this case.