IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
R.B. Misra, Surinder Singh, JJ.
State of Himachal Pradesh - Appellant.
Versus
Parkash Chand - Respondent.
Cr. Appeal No. 6 of 2008
Decided On : 23rd November, 2012
Narcotic Drugs - Acquittal under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 20 - Summary: The court discussed the definition of 'Charas' under Section 2(iii) of the Act and emphasized that the substance in question must conform to this definition to be considered contraband. It also highlighted the incomplete link evidence and the lack of certification regarding the safe custody of the case property, leading to the dismissal of the State's appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for allegedly possessing 200 grams of 'Charas'. The prosecution's case was based on the recovery of 'Charas' from the accused during a police raid.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the substance recovered did not conform to the definition of 'Charas' under the Act and emphasized the incomplete link evidence, leading to the dismissal of the State's appeal.
Issues: The issues revolved around the conformity of the recovered substance to the definition of 'Charas' and the completeness of the link evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The substance in question must conform to the definition of 'Charas' under the Act to be considered contraband, and the link evidence must be complete to establish the connection between the recovery and the alleged offence.
Final Decision: The State appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged of his bail bonds.
Surinder Singh, J.
The present appeal by the State has been directed against the acquittal of the respondent passed by the learned Trial Court on 04.07.2007 in Sessions Trial No.1 of 2007, for the offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short the Act) allegedly for keeping in possession 200 grams of “Charas”.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record.
3. In short, the case of the prosecution, is that on 27.09.2006, a police party headed by S.I.Mohinder Singh (PW6), had prior secret information that the accused was dealing in narcotics. On this information, he constituted a raiding party by joining Sh.Babu Ram (PW1) and Sh.Pritam Chand (PW4) local shopkeepers as independent witnesses. On the way, they came across the accused and he was stopped. Accused was informed by S.I.Mohinder Singh (PW6) that the police party entertained suspicion on him that he is possessed of some narcotic. As such, to satisfy the provision of Section 50 of the Act, PW.6 aforesaid gave option to him to be searched either by Magistrate or by a Gazetted Officer being his legal right in writing Ex.PW.1/A. The accused exercised the option and consented to be searched by the police party. The consent Memo Ex.PW1/B was signed by the accused. Thereafter, police party rendered themselves to be searched by the accused but nothing incriminating was found, as such, a Memo Ex.PW1/C was executed in the presence of the witnesses.
4. Thereafter, the personal search of the accused was conducted by I.O. PW.6, and recovered 200 grams of “Charas” from the pocket of the jacket worn by the accused. Out of which two samples of 5 grams each were separated and sealed with seal impression ‘M’ on each parcel. The facsimile of the seal was taken on a piece of cloth (Ex.P7) vide seizure memo Ex.PW1.E. The seal after its use was handed over to Babu Ram (PW1). The jacket aforesaid was also taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW1/D.
5. The accused was apprised of his arrest in writing and grounds of arrest Ex.PW1/G were informed to him. NCB forms in triplicate were also filled in on the spot. Out of which one is Ex.PW2/B. The facsimile of the seal used on the spot was also taken in the relevant column. “Ruqa” was sent for registration of the case which culminated into the present FIR.
6. MHC Parvesh Kumar (PW7) handed over the case file to PW.8 Sandeep Kumar with the direction to hand over the same to PW6 Mohinder Singh. PW.6 Mohinder Singh deposited the case property along with specimen of seal impressions, NCB forms and other documents with PW7 HC Parvesh Kumar for being entered into Malkhana register.
7. On 02.10.2006 vide R.C. No.143/21 PW.7 Parvesh Kumar handed over one sealed sample parcel, specimen seal impression, NCB forms to PW.5 HHC Shamsher Singh for depositing the same in the CFSL, Chandigarh, but the officials of CFSL Chandigarh raised some objections and he brought it back and deposited with HC Parvesh Kumar (PW7). On 9.10.2006, again PW.5 aforesaid was deputed to CFSL Chandigarh on the direction of PW7 to deposit one sealed parcel along with aforesaid specimen seal and NCB forms. It tested positive for charas. The report of the Chemical Examiner is Ex.PW6/G.
8. After completing the investigation, challan against the accused was filed for the aforesaid offence, he was put on trial and at the end got acquittal mainly on the ground that independent witnesses did not support the case of the prosecution and there were material contradictions in the statements of the official witnesses.
9. On reappraisal of the evidence on record, we find that the report of the analyst is not in conformity with the definition of Charas for which accused was tried. For the sake of convenience, result of the examination as per Ex.PW6/G is reproduced as under:-
“Various laboratory tests were carried out with the exibit-1 under reference for identification. Chemical tests and chro
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.