SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Raj) 51

Rajasthan High Court
Honble R.S. Verma, J.
Nathiya - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondents
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 165 of 1988
Decided On : January 30, 1991

Advocates Appeared:
Doongar Singh and Mahesh Bishnoi for appellants S.G. Ojha and B.S. Bhati P.P. for State.

Headnote:(a) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Section 50— Conditions under which search of person shall be taken—Section 55—Police to take charge of articles seized and delivered—No proper compliance of these provisions—Did not affix His seal—Specimen of seal not sent to laboratory—Report of chemical examiner not placed on record—Inspector allowed to take samples from the bags stored in police station without the orders of the Magistrate. (Paras 10 & 16)(b) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985—Section 57 and Criminal Procedure Code—Section 154—F.I.R.— Articles seized on the spot and memos prepared and on reaching the F.I.R. was recorded—The memos recite the number of the F.I.R. — Grave and serious discrepancy— Varacity doubted about the manner in which the recovery was made. (para 12)(c) Criminal Trial—Recovery officer lodging F.I.R. and seized articles—Should not investigate the matter—This principle is no longer res-integra—It is a basic infirmity—Investigation is bad—Reflects on the credibility of the inves-tigation. (Para 11)

       

Honble R.S. VERMA, J.—The learned Addl- Sessions Judge, Barmer has convicted the appellants Saffiya and Nathiya for offence u/s 20 (II) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and has sentenced each one of them to undergo R.I. for 20 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,00,000/- each and in default to undergo further R.I. for one year each. Aggrieved, Saffiya and Nathiya have come in appeal.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution story is that on 28. 2. 87 P.W. 5 Hamir Singh was posted as S.H.O., Police Station, Sheo. That day he was informed by the Superintendent of Police, Barmer that the latter had been informed by an informer that Nathiya and Saffiya were proceeding on two camels with contraband charas. Upon this information from the Superintendent of Police, Barmer, Shri Hamir Singh alongwith Dy. S.P. Govind Narayan, Head Constables Bijraj Singh and Heera Ram, Head Constable of C. I. D. Umaid Singh and other Police officials, namely, Girdhari Singh, Tajmal Singh, Kishan Singh and Pratapdan proceeded in Govt. jeep in search of the two persons towards village Dholakiya. In this connection, Hamir Singh before proceeding to Dholkiya, recorded a report (Ex. P. 12) in the daily Rojnamacha of the Police Station. When the police party reached near the northern outskirt of village Dholkiya, foot marks of two camels were seen proceeding towards village Mungeria. The Police party continued to proceed in the direction to which the foot marks led. On the outskirt of village Mungeria, the police party met P.W.6 Shyam Singh, an ex-police official, who was asked to accompany them. The police party along with Shyamsingh went towards sand dunes which lay at a distance of about 1 k.m. in the north from village Mungeria. There, the police party spotted two persons going on camels. The two camels and riders were surrounded and taken into custody. Each camel was carrying a pilan. Upon enquiries, one of the camel rider gave out his name as Nathiya while other accused a Saffiya. The police party found that three bags were being carried on the camel which Nathiya was riding. Four bags were being carried by the camel which Saffiya was riding. The police party got the bags unloaded. In the bags recovered from the came! of Nathiya 150 packets were found and from the bags carried by the camel of Saffiya 151 packets were found. Hamir Singh got opened the packets and after smelling them, found them to contain contraband charas. The two appellants were asked to produce licence or permit about the possession of the aforesaid contraband but they failed to produce any. Shri Hamir Singh, thereupon, prepared recovery memo, Ex.P. 1, site plan Ex. P. 12 and legand of the site plan Ex. P. 2. He arrested Saffiya vide arrest memo Ex. P. 3 and Nathiya vide arrest memo Ex. P. 4, He also prepared a memo Ex. P. 14 regarding the foot marks which had led to the apprehension of the appellants.

3. The prosecution story is that the police party took the accused persons to police Station, Sheo. The S. H. O. got the packets of contraband charas, weighed and took out samples from the various packets and sealed back the packets as also the samples recovered by him vide memo Ex. P. 5. The bags which contained the packets were marked 1 to 7 and each of the packet was also marked by Shri Hamir Singh. He further prepared recovery memo in respect of the two camels vide Ex. P. 6 and Ex. P. 7. The pilans of the two camels were handed over to custom officials vide Ex. P. 17.

4. Hamir Singh deposited the recovered bags containing the packets sealed by him as also the parcels of samples in the malkhana of the police station and enteries were made in the malkhana register. The bags of the packets as also parcels of the samples remained in custody of P.W. 1 Bijraj Singh who forwarded ?1 parcels of samples to the office of S.P., Barmer with P.W. 2 Moola Ram P. W. 2 Moola Ram took the sealed parcels of samples to the office of the S.P., Barmer th









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top