Budhroji Purohit Vs. State of Maharashtra
 INSC 440 (1
Nanavati, S.P.Kurdukar., Nanavati, J.
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.
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.
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 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.
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
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
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.
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.
appeal is, therefore, dismissed.