Ram Prasad Khandwal vs State Of Bihar

The judgment dated 19.04.2010 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 830 of 2009 by the High Court of Patna convicting the accused/appellant herein for the offence under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called "the NDPS Act") and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for 10 years, and pay fine of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) is called into question in this appeal.

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21.02.2006 the appellant/accused (was serving in Military, then), along with co-accused namely, one Ramesh Chandra Thakur was travelling in the North East Express train, when a police raiding party entered the train for checking. The raiding party wanted to check the drugs which were being illegally trafficked in the train. About 07.30 p.m. when the checking was going on and the raiding party reached the military compartment, the appellant and co-accused Ramesh Chandra Thakur were found sitting on a black iron box. When they saw the raiding party, they got up from the box and tried to walk away. The raiding party apprehended both the accused and enquired about the ownership of the box and the contents of the box. The appellant and other accused namely, Ramesh Chandra Thakur denied the ownership of the box. At the same time, a VIP suitcase was also found besides the said box out of which smell of ganja was emanating. Subsequently Ramesh Chandra Thakur opened the iron box with key and also opened the VIP suitcase, and it was found that the box as well as the VIP suitcase contain 37 kg of ganja.

The Trial Court as well as the High Court have convicted and sentenced the appellant and the aforesaid co-accused for the offence under the NDPS Act as mentioned supra.

We find that the only evidence as against the appellant is that he was found travelling along with the other accused namely, Ramesh Chandra Thakur and both were found sitting on the black iron box from which ganja was recovered. Except the aforementioned material no other incriminating material was found against the appellant. The keys of the box and the VIP suitcase were found in possession of the other accused namely, Ramesh Chandra Thakur and not with the appellant. Merely because the appellant was sitting along with the other accused on the box it cannot be conclusively said that the appellant shared any object of transporting the ganja along with the other accused namely, Ramesh Chandra Thakur. Both the courts have relied upon the confession statement made by the appellant before the police. It is needless to observe that any confession made by the accused before the police is inadmissible in evidence.

Upon going through the judgments of both the courts we find that the courts have come to the conclusion of guilt based only on assumptions and inferences, and not on reliable evidence. Since the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt as against the appellant the benefit of doubt enures to the appellant herein. Accordingly, the impugned judgments stand set aside so far as the appellant herein is concerned and the appeal is allowed accordingly. The appellant is acquitted of the charges levelled against him.