AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ashok Kumar Roopanwal, J.—This application u/s 482, Cr.P.C. has been moved for quashing the proceedings of case No. 163/10, u/s 8/20/27A/29 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. D.R.I., District Varanasi.
It appears from the record that Mahendra Jeep No. UP 33 B 5443 on which one Babban Singh was the Driver and Khairati Paswan was the Cleaner was intercepted by the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, near Roadways Bus Station, Varanasi and from this Jeep 221 Kg. of Ganja was recovered which was kept hidden in the Jeep. Later on, the statements of Babban Singh and Khairati Paswan were recorded by the officers of the concerned Department u/s 67 of the NDPS Act. Babban Singh stated that he started with that Jeep at 2.00 p.m. on 8.2.09 along with Cleaner Khairati Paswan. This Jeep was provided to them by the applicant Satendra Kumar Singh @ Satendra Singh S/o Baikunth Singh alleging that the Jeep belonged to him. The Jeep was given for bringing the contraband from Ara to Varanasi. The same type of statement was given by Khairati Paswan.
Heard Mr. P.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the Union of India and perused the record.
It has been argued by Mr. Singh that the registration of the Jeep was found to be forged and therefore, the applicant cannot be tagged with any liability. He further argued that the applicant was not arrested by the concerned Authorities nor anything was recovered from his possession and even the Jeep did not belong to him and therefore, he has wrongly been named in the case.
Even if it be assumed that the Jeep did not belong to the applicant and its registration certificate was found to be forged in that situation too the applicant cannot escape his liability more particularly when he was the person who is said to have provided Jeep to the Driver and the Cleaner for carrying the contraband from one place to another. From the fact of providing Jeep by the applicant which contained the contraband material hidden in it, it is very much clear that the applicant was instrumental in the trafficking of the contraband and there is prima facie material against him to lodge him in the present case. There is no reason to quash the proceedings.
The petition is dismissed.