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

CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.)  1179 of 1999

PETITIONER: STATE OF RAJASTHAN

RESPONDENT: GURMAIL SINGH

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 23/02/2005

BENCH: B.P.SINGH & ARUN KUMAR

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

                B.P.SINGH, J.    

       We have heard counsel for the State.

       This appeal has been preferred by the State of Rajasthan against  the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at  Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No.392 of 1996 dated May 6, 1998. The  Respondent who had been found guilty of the offence under Section 8  read with Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances  Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was sentenced to 10 years  rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1 lakh by the learned Special  Judge, N.D.P.S.Cases,                                                  ...2/-

                       -2-

Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.15 of 1995. The Respondent  preferred an appeal before the High Court which was allowed by the  High Court by its impugned judgment and order.          We have perused the judgment of the High Court. Apart from  other reasons recorded by the High Court, we find that the link evidence  adduced by the prosecution was not at all satisfactory. In the first  instance, though the seized articles are said to have been kept in the  malkhana on 20th May, 1995, the Malkhana register was not produced  to prove that it was so kept in the malkhana till it was taken over by  PW-6 on June 5, 1995. We further find that no sample of the seal was  sent along with the sample to Excise Laboratory, Jodhpur for the  purpose of comparing with the seal appearing on the sample bottles.  Therefore, there is no evidence to prove satisfactorily that the seals  found were in fact the same seals as were put on the sample bottles  immediately after seizure of the contraband. These loopholes in the  prosecution case have led the High Court to acquit the respondent.

                                               ...3/-

                       -3-

       We find no error in the judgment of the High Court.         This appeal is, therefore, dismissed.