http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: JAGDISH BUDHROJI PUROHIT

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       01/09/1998

BENCH: G.T. NANAVATI, S.P.KURDUKAR.,

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT NANAVATI, J. ----------- The appellant  has  been  convicted  under  Sections 20(b)(ii) and  22  of  the N.D.P.S.  Act by the Court of the Special Judge, Thana in Sessions case  No.    633/90.    The trial  court  sentenced  him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 12 years and to pay a fine of rupees  two  lakhs.    The appellant   challenged   his   conviction  and  sentence  by preferring Criminal Appeal No.  643/95 to the High Court  of Bombay.   The  High  Court confirmed the conviction and also the order of sentence.  It dismissed the  appeal.  Aggrieved by  the  judgment  and  order  passed  by the High Court the appellant has filed this appeal. What has been found against the appellant is that he was manufacturing mandrax tablets in his factory.  When  the Officers  of the Narcotics Control Bureau raided his factory on 23.8.1990 methaqualone powder weighing 492 Kgs.   mandrax tablets weighing 22.500 gms and 1.450 Kgs hashish were found from the  factory.    Before the trial court and also before the High Court the contentions of the  appellant  were  that Chemical  Examiner’s  reports  Exhibit  61  to  67  were not admissible in evidence as they  did  not  contain  any  data regarding analysis, the panchanamas were also not admissible as  the  notes on the basis of which they were prepared were not produced before the court and that the  brother  of  the appellant  who  was  throughout  the  raid  present  was not examined as  a  witness.    The  courts  did  not  find  any substance in these contentions. The  learned  counsel  for  the  appellant has again challenged before us the finding regarding admissibility  of reports  Exhibits  61 to 67 and in the alternative submitted that no weight should be attached to them  as  they  do  not contain  any data regarding the test applied by the Chemical Examiner  for  finding  out  the  contents  of  the  samples examined by him.  The reports Exhibits 61 to 67 do show that qualitative test  was followed by the Chemical Analyser.  As a result of that test he found methaqualone in  the  samples examined by him.  Moreover, in this case the prosecution had led evidence of  P.W.    1 vijay kumar Shahasane and P.W.  3

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

Sidram Dhange, members of the raiding party, to  prove  that the powder which was found from the factory was Methaqualone and  that the tablets which were found from the factory were methaqualone tablets.  Both of them have  stated  that  they have  received  sufficient training and thus have sufficient knowledge  about  narcotic  substance  and  the  methods  of testing them.    They  had  carried  with them a kit for the purpose of testing when they had raided  the  factory.    On analysis by them the powder was found to be methaqualone and tablets were found containing methaqualone.  Therefore, even if  Exhibits  61  to  67  are  ignored  there  is sufficient evidence on record  to  show  that  methaqualone  power  and tablets were  found  from the appellant’s factory.  Thus the appellant’s conviction under Section 22 of the N.D.P.S.  Act is quite proper.  Both the  witnesses  have  further  stated that  on  analysis  the green substance which was found from one of the cabins was hashish.  Therefore, conviction of the appellant under Section 20(b)(ii) of the N.D.P.S.    Act  is also quite proper. It was next contended by the  learned  counsel  that the  substance which was seized from the factory and sent by P.Ws 1 and 3 to the laboratory was of white  colour  but  in the  reports  of the Chemical Examiner it is stated that the colour of the  samples  examined  by  him  was  grey.    The evidence  establishes  that the samples were received by the Chemical Examiner in sealed condition and they were in tact. The samples were in fit condition for testing.  That  leaves no  doubt  about  the  material  seized from the factory and examined by the Chemical Examiner being the same. It  was  next  submitted that no evidence was led to prove that the appellant was in exclusive possession of  the factory  and in absence of such evidence his conviction must be regarded as illegal.    We  find  no  substance  in  this contention  also  because  P.W.1  has  clearly stated in his evidence that when he raided the factory it was locked.   He has  further stated that he had inquired about the appellant at his place of residence but he was not found.  The son  of the appellant  had  informed  P.W.    1  them  contacted the appellant’s brother but he was not able  to  say  where  the appellant was.    The  appellant had absconded and was found from Pune after about 2 months.    In  his  statement  under Section 313  Cr.P.C.    he  had  not  stated that he had not closed the factory or that he was not present at  that  time or  that  the  key  of the factory had remained with someone else.  The factory belonged to the appellant.   He  was  the sole proprietor.   In view of these facts and circumstances, it was necessary  for  the  appellant  to  explain  how  the offending articles  came  to  be found from his factory.  He did not offer any plausible  explanation.    Therefore,  the finding  recorded  by  the  trial court and confirmed by the High Court that the offending articles were found  from  the possession of the appellant appears to be quite justified. It  was  lastly  urged  that the appellant is an old man, therefore some leniency  should  be  shown  to  him  by reducing  the  substantive  sentence  to  the period already undergone.  Huge quantity  of  psychotropic  substances  was found from  the  possession  of the appellant.  A person who indulges in an  activity  of  this  type  does  not  deserve leniency. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed.