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

2024 Supreme(HP) 30

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, RAKESH KAINTHLA, JJ.
Latadeen – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
Cr. Appeal No. 387 of 2020
Decided On : 10-05-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Rajesh Mandhotra, Kanta Thakur.
For the Respondent: Seema Sharma.

Headnote:

NDPS Act - Conviction under Section 20 - [SUMMARY OF ACT SECTIONS REFERENCED AND DISCUSSED: Section 20 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act] - The court analyzed the testimonies of the witnesses, inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, and the compliance with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act. The court found that the inconsistencies regarding the place of association of independent witnesses, the number of persons present during the search, the sealing of the case property, and the date of the accused's arrest raised doubts about the prosecution's case. The court concluded that the accused was entitled to the benefit of the doubt and acquitted him of the offense punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act.

Fact of the Case:

The police presented a challan against the accused for the commission of an offense punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, alleging the recovery of charas from the accused's house. The prosecution's case was based on the testimonies of witnesses and the compliance with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court found inconsistencies in the testimonies of the witnesses, non-compliance with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act, and doubts regarding the prosecution's case. Consequently, the court acquitted the accused of the offense punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act.

Issues: The issues revolved around the reliability of witness testimonies, compliance with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act, and the inconsistencies in the prosecution's case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the inconsistencies in the testimonies of the witnesses, non-compliance with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act, and doubts raised about the prosecution's case, leading to the benefit of the doubt being extended to the accused.

Final Decision: The accused was acquitted of the offense punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act.

 

1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22.09.2020, passed by learned Special Judge-IV, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. vide which the appellant (accused before the learned Trial Court) was convicted of the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘NDPS Act’) and order dated 23.09.2020 vide which, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 11 years and pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for the commission of aforesaid offence. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act. It was asserted that ASI-Desh Raj (PW-15), HC-Ajay Kumar (PW-1), HHC-Vimal Kumar (PW-13), and HHC-Yashwant (PW-10) were present at 32 miles in a private vehicle bearing registration no. HP-38B-4612 on 07.07.2016 at about 1:30 pm. ASI Des Raj received a secret information that the accused Latadeen used to sell charas in his home and a huge quantity of charas could be recovered by searching the house. The information was credible, and any delay in procuring the warrant would have destroyed the case property; hence, the information was reduced into writing (Ext.PW-7/A) and was sent to Sub Divisional Police Officer (SDPO), Jawali through HHC-Yashwant Singh (PW-10). The information was also sent to the Police Station for the registration of the FIR. Sudarshana Kumari (PW-4) and Babu Ram (PW-2) were associated as witnesses. Surjeet Singh (PW-3) was associated as a Photographer. The search of the house of the accused was conducted in their presence. The process of the search was also videographed. One carton wrapped with blankets and one shaving kit containing currency notes worth Rs. 20,000/- in the denomination of Rs. 100 were recovered from room No. 4 during the search. The carton contained black sticks wrapped in polythene. The sticks were smelled and were found to be charas. One weighing scale (Ext.P7) and weights (Ext.P8 to P12) were also found. The charas was weighed with the help of the scale and the weights and its weight was found to be 1 Kg 200 grams of charas. Currency notes of Rs. 20,000/- purse, scale, weights and carton were seized by the police. Charas was put in a cloth parcel and the parcel was sealed with six impressions of seal ‘EW’. Currency notes were put in the purse/shaving kit and the purse was sealed in a cloth parcel with four impressions of seal ‘EW’. Scale and weights were put in a Borru and the Borru was sealed with one seal impression of seal ‘EW’. The carton was put in another Borru and the Borru was sealed with one seal of seal impression ‘EW’. The seal impression (Ext.PW-1/B) was taken on a separate piece of cloth. NCB-I form (Ext.PW-9/D) was filled in triplicate and the seal was handed over to Babu Ram after the use. The parcels were seized vide memo (Ext.PW-1/C). The police registered the FIR (Ext.PW-14/A) based on the rukka. ASI-Desh Raj conducted the investigation. He prepared the spot map (Ext.PW-15/B) and recorded the statements of the witnesses as per their version. He arrested the accused and gave the arrest information to the son of the accused vide memo (Ext.PW-15/E). He conducted the personal search of the accused and prepared the memo (Ext.PW-15/F). The photographs of the proceedings (Ext.PW-3/A1 to PW-3/A8) were taken. The video recording of the proceedings was transferred to the CD (Ext.PW-3/B) and Surjeet Singh issued the certificate (Ext.PW-3/C). The case property was handed over to Inspector Surjeet Kumar (PW-14), who re-sealed the parcel containing charas with four seal impressions of seal ‘H’. He also put

            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