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

2011 Supreme(HP) 2511

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
SURINDER SINGH, J.
Ram Pal — Appellant
Versus
State Of H.P. — Respondent
Criminal A.No. 25 of 2005
Decided on : 19-10-2011

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :N.K. Thakur, Advocate
For the Respondent:A.K. Bansal, Addl. Advocate

The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to establish a clear chain of custody for seized substances and related evidence, emphasizing the importance of proper handling and documentation of case property and the need for satisfactory link evidence to support the prosecution's case.

Headnote:

Narcotic Drugs - Possession - Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - [Section 20] - [Summary of the Act and Sections]: The court discussed the provisions of Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which deals with punishment for contravention in relation to manufactured drugs and preparations. The court highlighted the importance of link evidence and the proper handling and documentation of case property, emphasizing the need for the prosecution to establish a clear chain of custody for the seized substances and related evidence.

Fact of the Case:

The accused was convicted under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for possession of charas. The prosecution's case was based on the recovery of charas from the accused and the subsequent chemical analysis confirming the substance. The accused denied the allegations, claiming false implication.

Finding of the Court:

The court found discrepancies and contradictions in the prosecution's evidence, including issues with the handling and documentation of case property, the lack of proper link evidence, and inconsistencies in the statements of witnesses. These discrepancies raised doubts about the authenticity of the prosecution's case.

Issues: The key issues revolved around the reliability of the prosecution's evidence, including the handling and documentation of case property, the credibility of witnesses, and the establishment of a clear chain of custody for the seized substances.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of proper handling and documentation of case property, including the need for clear link evidence and a consistent chain of custody for seized substances. The court's decision was influenced by the lack of satisfactory evidence and the presence of discrepancies and contradictions in the prosecution's case.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court was set aside, and the accused was acquitted due to the benefit of doubt. The fine, if deposited, was ordered to be refunded to the accused, and the accused was discharged of his bail bonds.

JUDGMENT :

Surinder Singh, J.

Appellant hereinafter referred to as "the accused" was convicted by the learned trial court under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in short 'the Act' for keeping in possession 200 grams of charas (noncommercial quantity) as such he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-,. In default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for a period of three months. Hence the present appeal by the accused.

2. In short, the prosecution case can be stated thus. PW9 Harbans Lal ASI was posted as In charge of CIA Staff, Una. On 10.12.2002 he along with HC PW14 Nardev Singh, constables Suresh Kumar, Subhash Chand, Sanjeev Kumar and HHC Sher Bahadur were present near Government Middle School at Mourbar.

(ii) PW5 HHC Rajinder Singh of the CIA Staff was present at Kallon Chowk near Bangarh where he had received a secret information around 2.45 p.m. that the accused was indulging in the illicit business of charas along with his accomplice Kalyan Singh and both were present in the house of Ram Pal which was under construction. He informed PW9 Harbans Lal giving the description of the accused and his accomplice. This information was reduced into writing Ext. PH by PW9 aforesaid and an information was also sent under Section 42 (2) of the Act to the Superintendent of Police, Una through constable Suresh Kumar.

(iii) A Ruka was sent through constable Sanjeev Kumar for registration of the FIR to the Police Station. Thereafter PW9 received the message from S.P. Una to report immediately to his office thus he handed over the further investigation of the case to PW14 H.C. Nardev Singh.

(iv) Nardev Singh formed the Raiding Party and included two independent witnesses PW1 Ram Dev, PW2 Sohni Khan and constable Sher Bahadur. The raiding party reached the place where the house of the accused was under construction. There they noticed the accused wearing green jacket and black pant and his accomplice red jacket and white pant. On seeing the police Kalyan Singh, who was wearing green jacket threw a polythene envelop on the spot and escaped. The other person, i.e., Ram Paul accused wearing red jacket and white pant was apprehended by the police.

(v) Police asked about the identity of Ram Paul and gave him an option in writing Ext. PA to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate to which he has legal right in the presence of witness Ram Dev, Sohni Khan and H.C. Sher Bahadur.

(vi) Accused Ram Paul opted to be searched by the police party. The raiding party rendered themselves to be searched by the accused and nothing incriminating was found as such memo Ext. PB was prepared to this effect.

(vii) Thereafter PW14 HC Nardev conducted the personal search of the accused and recovered one polythene packet containing 200 grams of charas from right side pocket of his pant. Another packet which was lying on the ground was containing small scale and weights of different specifications viz 200 grams, 100 grams, 50 grams, 20 grams, 10 grams and 5 grams along with an empty polythene envelop.

(viii) The packet/envelop which was allegedly thrown on the spot by accused Kalyan Singh was containing 125 grams of charas.

(ix) Police separated four samples of 10 grams each from the charas recovered from the accused and packet thrown on the spot. The sample as well as envelop were sealed by making separate parcels with seal impression producing the impression of English letter "N". The scale, weights and sample envelops were sealed in a separate parcel with the same seal.

(x) Case property was taken into possession vide memo Ext. P6.

(xi) Accused was arrested and grounds of arrest were informed to him vide memo Ext. PF.

(xii) Site plan Ext. PL of the alleged place of recovery was prepared. Seal impression applied on case property on the spot were taken on a piece of cloth Ext. PW1/B The relevant portion of the NCB forms, were filled in on the spot, one of w

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top