SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES
The present Special Leave Petition is preferred against the impugned judgment/order dated 20.08.20__ in Criminal Appeal No. __ of 20__ passed by the High Court of Sikkim, whereby the Hon'ble High Court dismissed an appeal against the order of conviction & sentence dated 19.12.20__ passed by the Learned Special Judge, Sikkim Anti-Drugs Act (S.A.D.A). The SADA Court, on the basis of inconclusive and inconsistent statements of the prosecution witnesses (most of whom were police officers) regarding the recovery of some contraband articles in a vehicle which the petitioner was allegedly driving, convicted him for transportation of prescription drugs/contraband articles and sentenced him for four years imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh.
Brief Facts of the Case
The petitioner herein was a car-driver aged __ years. According to the Police, on 28.10.20__, one Respondent No. 2 along with the Petitioner were entering the State of Sikkim from West Bengal side, wherein their car was searched and capsules & cough syrup bottles were recovered from the car. The two accused were arrested. Subsequently, the police obtained a report from a forensic laboratory which stated that the capsules and cough syrup contain certain chemicals, which the prosecution then claimed to be prohibited under SADA.
The Ld. Special Judge as well as the Hon'ble High Court of Sikkim erroneously placed reliance on the statements of some prosecution witnesses, while ignoring the others. The Ld. Judge also erroneously overlooked glaring inconsistencies in the witness statements, some of which are as follows:
28.10.20__ According to the Police, the present petitioner was proceeding towards Melli, South Sikkim in a vehicle bearing registration number ____ from West Bengal. He was the driver of the said vehicle. The vehicle was checked at the Melli Check Post and some contraband articles were recovered. Thereafter, FIR No: _____, Dated: _____, under Section (s) 9 and 14 of Sikkim Anti Drugs Act (SADA), 2006 was registered against the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 herein. A copy of the FIR dated
28.10.2013 is annexed as Annexure P1 (pages ______ to ______).
28.10.20__According to the Police, the some contraband articles were seized from the vehicle being driven by the petitioner at 12:00 PM on 28.10.20__. The Property Seizure memo of Petitioner here in states that the property seized from the Petitioner comprised 20 bottles of cough syrup Lupicof along with the vehicle bearing registration no. _____, RC Book, Insurance Papers and Pollution Check papers. A copy of the property seizure memo dated 28.10.20__ in the name of the Petitioner herein is annexed as Annexure P2 (pages _______ to _______). The Property Seizure memo of the Respondent No.2 comprised __ bottles of cough syrup lupicof, __ capsules of Spasmo proxyvon. A copy of the property seizure memo dated 28.10.20__ in the name of the Respondent No. 2 herein is annexed as Annexure P3 (pages _______ to _______).
29.10.20__ The petitioner herein paid the requisite fees for his medical treatment at Sikkim Rehabilitation & Detoxification Centre, Nimtar, East Sikkim, a government approved centre for de-addiction. The petitioner filed a bail petition for his release so that he could get admitted at a government approved de-addiction centre for undergoing medical treatment for de-addiction.
19.12.20__ The Court of Special Judge (SADA) South Sikkim vide its final judgment dated 19.12.20__ convicted the petitioner and the respondent no. 2 herein of the offences under Section 9(d) of SADA, 2006 read with Section 34 of the IPC 1860 and Rule 17(1) of the SADA Rules, 2007 read with Section 14 of SADA 2006 and Section 34 of IPC 1860. A copy of the judgment of trial court convicting the petitioner dated 19.12.20__ is annexed as Annexure P17 (pages_____ to _____).
17.02.20__ The petitioner herein filed Criminal Appeal No. 03/20__ at the High Court of Sikkim at Gangtok. A copy of the criminal appeal filed
