Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
RAJIV SHARMA, SURESHWAR THAKUR, JJ.
Prakash Chand - Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. Appeal No. 119 of 2011
Decided on : 04-11-2014
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Conviction under Section 20/29 - 1985 - Summary: The court upheld the conviction of the accused under Section 20/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The prosecution successfully proved the recovery of charas from the accused's possession, and the court found no merit in the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was convicted under Section 20/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for the possession of charas. The prosecution presented evidence of the recovery of charas from the accused's possession, and the accused pleaded not guilty.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had successfully proved the case against the accused, and the recovery of charas from the accused's possession was established. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction of the accused.
Issues: The main issue was whether the prosecution had proved the case against the accused and established the recovery of charas from the accused's possession.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the evidence presented by the prosecution, including witness testimonies and forensic reports, to establish the recovery of charas from the accused's possession. The court also determined that the provisions of Section 42 and Section 50 of the Act were not applicable in this case, as it was a case of chance recovery.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction of the accused under Section 20/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
JUDGMENT :
Rajiv Sharma, J.
1. This appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 26.3.2011, rendered by the learned Special Judge (II), Kinnaur at Rampur, H.P. in RBT No. 20-AR/3 of 2010, whereby the appellant accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused) who was charged with and tried for offence under Section 20/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. Tara Chand was acquitted, hence this appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that on 13.12.2008, S.I Gurbachan Singh, P.S.Anni alongwith ASI Ludar Singh, Constable Hari Singh and Constable Bhoop Singh left Police Station Anni in connection with investigation of case FIR No. 119/08 dated 12.12.2008 and also for detection of cases under Excise Act, NDPS Act and Forest Act and for checking of traffic towards Swad, Kanda Aran side. At about 2 pm accused Prakash Chand came from Swad side holding a bag on his back. He stopped at a distance of 25 meters. He turned back and tried to escape. He was apprehended. S.I. Gurbachan Singh informed the accused that he intended to conduct his search and also apprised him of his right of being searched in the presence of the Magistrate or a gazetted officer. The accused opted to be searched by the police on the spot. S.I. Gurbachan Singh alongwith ASI Ludar Singh and Constable Bhoop singh were joined by him as witnesses. They gave their personal search to the accused. The bag was checked. It contained 6 kgs 250 gms charas. The sampling and seizure procedure was completed and NCB forms in triplicate were filled in. The =rukka' was sent to PS Anni through Constable Hari Singh on the basis of which FIR No. 121/2008 was registered. The accused was arrested the case property was deposited in the malkhana. The case was investigated and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.
3. The prosecution has examined as many as 13 witnesses to prove its case. The accused persons were also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C to which they pleaded not guilty. Accused also examined two witnesses in defence. The learned Trial Court convicted accused Prakash Chand, as stated hereinabove.
4. Mr. Manoj Pathak, Advocate, for the accused has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. According to him, no independent witness was associated by the prosecution, though available. On the other hand, Mr. M.A.Khan, learned Addl. Advocate General, has supported the judgment dated 26.3.2011, of the learned trial Court.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records of the case meticulously.
6. PW-1, ASI Luder Singh, deposed that on 13.12.2008, he accompanied S.I. Gurbachan Singh along with Constable Hari Singh and Bhoop Singh to Nagan. One person was apprehended who was carrying one Pithu and coming from Swad side towards Nagan. The accused was given option to be searched either before Magistrate or gazetted officer. Accused opted to be searched by the police vide memorandum Ext. PW-1/A. Constable Hari Singh was deputed to procure some independent witnesses but Constable Hari Singh came after some time as no independent witness was found to be associated. S.I. Gurbachan Singh after associating the official witnesses offered his search to accused Prakash Chand vide memorandum Ext. PW-1/B. The search of Pithu was carried out. It contained 6 kg 250 gms charas. Out of this contraband, two samples of 25 gms each were drawn separately and the remaining charas was put into the same polythene packet and pithu bag which was put into a separate sealed packet as P1 duly sealed with seal =C' in the separate packet. NCB forms were filled in. The sample charas and remaining charas was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ext. PW-1/C. Constable Bhoop Singh and accused Pr
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
