IMPORTANT POINT
Presumption of culpable mental state - Initial burden is cast on prosecution to establish essential factors on which its case is premised - Standard of proof required for accused to prove his innocence, is not pegged as high as expected of prosecution.

JUDGMENT :

Hima Kohli, J.

1. The present appeals arise from the common judgment dated 08th July, 2013 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh deciding the Murder Reference¹[Murder Reference No. 5 of 2012 titled Narcotics Control Bureau, Chandigarh Zonal Unit v. Balwinder Singh @ Binda] prepared by the Judge, Special Court for confirmation of death sentence, appeal²[CRA No. D-365-DB of 2012] preferred by Balwinder Singh³[Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1136 of 2014] and the appeal⁴[CRA No. D-371-DB of 2012] filed by Satnam Singh⁵[Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1933 of 2014].

1.1 By the impugned judgment, the death sentence imposed upon Balwinder Singh³[supra] was set aside under the Reference, thereby declining the Reference and imposed a sentence on him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 14 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,50,000/- [Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only] and in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for commission of offence under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985⁶[For short ‘NDPS Act’]. The appeals preferred by the accused were dismissed except for the modification in the order of sentence. Both the accused are before this Court in these appeals by way of special leave.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX:

(a) THE INCIDENT IN QUESTION

2. The incident in question relates back to 11th December, 2005, when as per the version of the prosecution, the Narcotics Control Bureau⁷[For short ‘NCB’] received secret information that some persons who were indulging in the sale of contraband, were travelling in a white coloured Indica car from Amritsar to supply contraband at a bus stand at Chandigarh. On 12th December, 2005, at 01:00 am, a naka was laid by the NCB team at Chandigarh and two independent witnesses [Mukesh Kumar and Sonu⁸[PW-1] were associated in the investigation. At 03:15 am, the NCB team noticed that a car⁹[White coloured Indica Car bearing registration number HR-01-J-9639 (Marked as P-1)] coming from Sector 25 and heading towards Sector 24, Chandigarh, stopped at a little distance from the place of naka and two persons wearing turbans alighted from the car and ran away. However, the third person, also wearing a turban who had later on disclosed his name as Satnam Singh⁵[supra], remained seated in the car.

2.1. Members of the NCB team intercepted the vehicle and searched Satnam Singh⁵[supra] in the presence of the independent witnesses. On searching the car, they found two packets wrapped in a khaki tape in the cavity of the door panel. On unzipping the seat cover of the rear back seat of the vehicle, two more similar packets wrapped in khaki tape were recovered. The prosecution claims that on inquiry, Satnam Singh⁵[supra] disclosed that the packets contained heroin that he had brought from Amritsar with the assistance of Balwinder Singh³[supra] and a person named Harpreet Singh alias Preet alias Sarpanch for sale in Chandigarh. He further disclosed that Balwinder Singh³[supra] and Sarpanch ran away when the car had stopped a few yards before the naka. The NCB officers seized all the four packets and after taking out two representative samples, sealed them. The samples of the packets were signed by Satnam Singh⁵[supra], the two independent witnesses, Intelligence Officer - Balwinder Kumar¹⁰[PW-2] and O.P. Sharma, Superintendent, NCB¹¹[PW-5 (wrongly mentioned as PW-10 in the trial Court judgement)].

(b) THE INVESTIGATION

2.2. A panchnama¹²[Exhibit P-1/E] in respect of the recovery made was prepared at the spot, read over to Satnam Singh⁵[supra] who signed it. So did the independent witnesses. Thereafter, Satnam Singh⁵[supra] was arrested and his statement¹³[Exhibit PW-1/B] was recorded after issuing him a notice¹⁴[Exhibit P-5] under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. He was also searched personally. The statements of the independent witnesses [Sonu¹⁵[Exhibit PW-1/D] and Mukesh¹⁶[Exhibit P-9] were recorded. Satnam Singh⁵[supra] was produced b