Sayar Puri Vs. State of Rajasthan
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 224 of 1997
( From the Judgment and Order dated 24.5.96 of the Rajasthan High Court in S.B.Crl.A.No. 586 of 1994 )
( From the Judgment and Order dated 24.5.96 of the Rajasthan High Court in S.B.Crl.A.No. 586 of 1994 )
Petitioner: Sayar Puri
Respondent: State of Rajasthan
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 224 of 1997
( From the Judgment and Order dated 24.5.96 of the Rajasthan High Court in S.B.Crl.A.No. 586 of 1994 )
( From the Judgment and Order dated 24.5.96 of the Rajasthan High Court in S.B.Crl.A.No. 586 of 1994 )
Judges: G.T. NANAVATI & S.P. KURDUKAR , JJ.
Date of Judgment: Feb 09, 1998
Appearances:
Mr. P.S. Jha , Advocate for the Appellant .
Mr. K.S. Bhati , Advocate for the Respondent .
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAWS
Narcotic Drugs and Psychtropic Substances (Amendment) Act, 1985
Section 42(2) read with Section 8 and 18 – Absence of site plan – Evidence showing the accused sitting on public road – Held that procedure under Section 42(2) was not required to be followed nor site plan was required to be prepared . ( Para 2 )
Section 5 – Compliance of – Search – Accused informed of his right – No objection to search by PW , who informed of his rights – Held that provisions were complied with . ( Para 2 )
JUDGEMENT:
NANAVATI , J. :
1 . The appellant has been convicted under Section 8 read with Section 18 of the N.D.P.S. Act as he was found in possession of opium . He is challenging his conviction in this appeal .
2 . The contention raised on behalf of the appellant is that no site plan was prepared by the police to prove that the place where the appellant was found sitting was a part of the public road . In our opinion this contention is misconceived . The police officers who were examined in this case and also the panch wit-nesses have stated that the accused was found sitting on a bench on the Mandia Road . Thus the accused was found sitting on a public road and , therefore , neither the procedure under Section 42(2) of the Act was required to be followed nor the site plan was required to be prepared . Another contention raised by the appellant is that the requirements of Section 50 of the Act have not been strictly complied with . We find no substance in this contention . Section 50 prescribes the manner in which the search of the person shall be conducted . No breach of any particular condition has been pointed out . Moreover , we find that P.W. 1 has stated in his evidence that he had complied with those condi-tions . P.W. 1 had informed the appellant about his rights . He has further stated that the appellant had told him that he had no objection if he was searched by him .
3 . The appeal is , therefore , dismissed .
1 . The appellant has been convicted under Section 8 read with Section 18 of the N.D.P.S. Act as he was found in possession of opium . He is challenging his conviction in this appeal .
2 . The contention raised on behalf of the appellant is that no site plan was prepared by the police to prove that the place where the appellant was found sitting was a part of the public road . In our opinion this contention is misconceived . The police officers who were examined in this case and also the panch wit-nesses have stated that the accused was found sitting on a bench on the Mandia Road . Thus the accused was found sitting on a public road and , therefore , neither the procedure under Section 42(2) of the Act was required to be followed nor the site plan was required to be prepared . Another contention raised by the appellant is that the requirements of Section 50 of the Act have not been strictly complied with . We find no substance in this contention . Section 50 prescribes the manner in which the search of the person shall be conducted . No breach of any particular condition has been pointed out . Moreover , we find that P.W. 1 has stated in his evidence that he had complied with those condi-tions . P.W. 1 had informed the appellant about his rights . He has further stated that the appellant had told him that he had no objection if he was searched by him .
3 . The appeal is , therefore , dismissed .
