CRL. A. NO. 37 of 2006 1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 37 OF 2006

STATE OF RAJASTHAN ..... APPELLANT

VERSUS

BHOPA RAM ..... RESPONDENT

O0 R D E R

1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This  appeal  against  acquittal  arises  from  the  

judgment of the High Court in a prosecution under Section  

8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.  

The trial court, relying on the evidence of P.Ws. 4, 5, 11  

and  12,  convicted  the  respondent  and  sentenced  him  to  

undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to a fine of  

Rs. 1 lakh and in default thereof to further undergo simple  

imprisonment for a period of six months.  The judgment of  

the  trial  court  has  been  reversed  in  appeal.   The  High  

Court has recorded a positive finding  that the prosecution  

story given in Exhibit P2 the notice issued under Section  

50 of the Act was a concoction.   In other words, the High

CRL. A. NO. 37 of 2006 2

Court has doubted the very factum of the recovery.  Dr.  

Manish Singhvi, the learned Additional Advocate General for  

the State has, however, argued that in the facts of the  

case, Section 50 was not applicable.  This submission is  

undoubtedly correct insofar as the import of the provision  

is concerned but the High Court has on a consideration of  

the evidence held that as Exhibit P2 had been apparently  

created after the recovery had been made and there appeared  

to be some doubt as regards the recovery itself casting a  

doubt on the conduct of the investigation.  We are thus not  

inclined to interfere in this matter.

We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal.

........................... J

      [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

........................... J

      [CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD]

NEW DELHI OCTOBER 26, 2010.