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

2005 Supreme(HP) 461

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA,ABHILASHA KUMARI
MANMOHAN SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF H.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 396 of 2003
Decided On : 12/26/2005

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Som Dutt Vasudeva, Additional Advocate General, for the Respondent

The judgment establishes the admissibility of evidence collected during search and seizure, the compliance with the provisions of Section 42 and Section 43 of the NDPS Act, and the establishment of ownership of the recovered contraband.

Headnote:

NDPS - Conviction under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 20 of the NDPS Act - The judgment discusses the compliance with the provisions of Section 42 and Section 43 of the NDPS Act, the admissibility of evidence collected during search and seizure, and the establishment of ownership of the recovered contraband. The court also refers to legal principles established in Ramesh Kumar v. State of H.P. and Khet Singh v. Union of India.

Fact of the Case:

The accused was convicted under Section 20 of the NDPS Act for possessing Charas. The prosecution's case was based on a secret information received by the police, leading to the recovery of Charas from the accused's bag in a bus.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution had sufficiently established the ownership of the accused with the bag from which Charas was recovered. The accused's exclusive and conscious possession of the bag was established, leading to the affirmation of the conviction and sentence.

Issues: The issues included compliance with the provisions of Section 42 and Section 43 of the NDPS Act, admissibility of evidence collected during search and seizure, and the establishment of ownership of the recovered contraband.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that there was no serious prejudice caused to the accused, as there was no breach of the law during search and seizure. The court also emphasized the admissibility of evidence collected during search and seizure, and the establishment of ownership of the recovered contraband.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, affirming the accused's conviction and sentence under Section 20 of the NDPS Act.

JUDGMENT

Abhilasha Kumari, J.—Manmohan Singh appellant (hereinafter referred to as "the accused") has filed this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 30.7.2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi in Sessions Trial No. 31 of 2001 under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "NDPS" Act). He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- ( rupees one lac) failing which, he was to suffer simple imprisonment for two months.

2. The prosecution case is that on 6.4.2001 PW-12 Ashish Sharma Inspector/SHO, Police Station, Sadar Mandi alongwith PW-7 Sub-Inspector Brijesh Sood, ASI Ram Karan, ASI Raghubir Singh, Head Constable Kesar Singh, Constable Surjay Chand and Constable Jawala Ram was on routine patrol duty in the Seri Bazar Mandi. PW Ashish Sharma Inspector received a secret information at about 6.40 p.m. that Tourist bus bearing registration No. 1-1881 of Savagtam Travel coming from Manali on its way to Delhi, one person sitting on seat No. 31 of the said bus was carrying Charas in his bag. PW-12 the empowered officer reduced the information Ext. P-12/ A into writing under Section 42 of the NDPS Act. A copy of information Ext. PW-12/A was sent to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mandi under Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act through PW-2 constable Udai Chand. The raiding party laid a Nakka at Pull Gharat on the road between Mandi town and Sundernagar. The bus reached at Pull Gharat at about 7.45 p.m. which was signalled to be stopped. PW-11 Krishan Chand, the driver of the bus stopped the vehicle and PW-10 Khem Ram was its conductor. PW-12 alongwith PW-7 Sub-Inspector Brijesh Sood and other police personnel entered the bus and found one person sitting therein on seat No. 31. The name and antecedents of the said person were enquired into by the police, who disclosed his name Manmohan Singh the present accused. PW-12 made enquiry from the accused about his luggage. PW-10 conductor of the bus disclosed that one bag owned by the accused was kept in the Dicky of the bus, on which he wrote seat No. 31 with chalk. The police personnel alongwith the accused and conductor got down from the bus. PW-8 Yog Raj a shopkeeper was called to join the investigation/search. On the Dicky of the bus being opened by the conductor, bag Ex. P-l was taken out which bag carried the label of Unex and on it, 31 was scribed with chalk. The accused is stated to have admitted the ownership of the bag. On opening the said bag few clothings were found in the main portion of the bag and from inside pocket one key containing four keys, one death certificate of one Sh. Dhola Singh (wrongly mentioned as Sh. Bhola Singh in the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge) and one Maxima Quartaz guarantee card in the name of Manmohan was found. Inside the clothes, three parcels of polythene papers sealed with tape were found. When these three packets were opened, they were found to be containing Charas in card board boxes in different shapes and sizes. Constable Jawala Ram was sent for bringing weighing machine from Police Canteen which he brought the same and on weighing the Charas, it was found to be 7 kg. 500 gms. Two samples of 50 gms each of Charas were separated and sealed in three cigarette empty packets with seal impression T.. Residue Charas weighing 7 kg 400 grams was put in a polythene bag and wrapped with cloth and sealed with seal impression T. The seal after use was handed over to PW-8 Yog Raj. All the above stated articles were taken into possession through memos Ex. PW-7/A and the copy of memo was given to the accused. Thereafter the rukka Ex.PW-12/C was scribed on the spot and sent through H.C. Kesar Singh for registration of FIR to the Police Station. Travelling ticket of the accused was taken into possession through memo Ex. PW-7/C. It was found by the Investigating Officer that the conductor had retained all th



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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