Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Section 22(c) & 29—Illegally transportation of pentazocine (Fortwin injections), a psychotropic substance—Conviction—Consignment was book by first accused and there is no allegation against appellant of transporting the contraband—Consignment was booked in the name of first accused as per prosecution case—Unless it is proved that appellant had supplied the consignment to first accused or was a part of criminal conspiracy to commit an offence under Section 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, the appellant cannot be punished—No evidence on record to show that third accused procured the contraband that is the subject matter of prosecution and handed it over to the appellant or the first accused—Appellant’s statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act is not admissible in evidence and cannot be read in evidence—Prosecution withheld the crucial witness from the court—An adverse inference must be drawn against prosecution—No incriminating material recovered from appellant—No evidence to show that contraband tried to be transported by first accused by railway parcel was delivered by or on behalf of appellant to first accused—No evidence of any conspiracy against appellant—Even in the charge, there is no reference to the allegation of commission of an offence under Section 29 of the Act—Respondent has not established the offence punishable under Section 22(c) and 29 of the NDPS Act against the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt—Conviction set aside.
[Paras 7 to 13]