news details |
|
|
| Shoddy investigation leads to acquittal of narco smugglers | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Sept 24 : Principal Sessions Judge Jammu RS Jain today acquitted two accused Abdul Hameed Rashi s/o Abdul Ahad Rashi R/o Adder, Bijbehara, Anantnag and Javaid Ahamad Sofi s/o Assad ullaha Sofi r/o Uranhall,Anantnag PS Bijbehara, Ananatnag who were facing trial in NDPS Case as prosecution miserably failed.
The present complaint has been filed by the Intelligence Officer of Narcotics Control Bureau, Jammu Zonal unit, Jammu against the accused Abdul Hameed Rashi and Javaid Ahamad Sofi for offences under Sections 8/16/20 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'NDPS Act').
In the complaint it has been averred that on 31.3.2012 secret information was received from reliable source by Naresh Kumar, Intelligence officer of NCB Jammu that accused persons would be transporting drugs from Kashmir valley to Akhnoor in Tavera vehicle. On stopping the vehicle it was found that accused Javed was driving the vehicle and accused Abdul Hameed was sitting as co-passenger. On the request of Naresh Kumar, both the accused agreed that the vehicle may be searched to see whether there was any narcotic drugs in the vehicle or not.
That Naresh Kumar instructeded his sepoys namely Koushal Kumar and P N Thusoo to search the vehicle. On searching the vehicle, Koushal Kumar discovered plastic bag from under the middle seat of tavera vehicle and was found to contain 16 packets and the same were wrapped in packing tape.
Thereafter, Naresh Kumar opened four packets out of 16 packets and extracted small quantity of black coloured material from each of the four packets and mixed them thoroughly and tested withdrug detection kit and found the result to be positive for charas.
The weight of all the packets was 7.248 kgs. Principal Sessions Judge Jammu RS Jain after hearing Adv Prince Khanna appearing for the accused persons, observed that the legislature had enacted and provided certain safeguards in various provisions of the Act, in all case which must be proved to have been strictly followed. The harsh provisions of the Act cast a duty upon
the prosecution to strictly follow the provisions of the NDPS Act. Even so, a close scrutiny of the circumstances under which these statements have being recorded and the suspicious circumstances attending these statements makes it unsafe to render a conviction on the basis of these statements of the accused. Looking to the quality of the evidence adduced by the complainant, Court is of the view that it would be unsafe to base a conviction on the basis of statements made under section 67 of the NDPS Act without any independent corroboration which statements in any case do not stand the test laid down by the various Courts. With these observations Court acquitted the accused. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
