Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 635

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
Fuman Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Cr. Appeal No. 464 of 2010
Decided on : 04-03-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Atharv Sharma.
For the Respondent:Mr. Gautam Sood, Deputy Advocate General for respondent-State.

The absence of independent witnesses does not invalidate the prosecution case, and minor discrepancies in police testimonies do not undermine their credibility.

Headnote:
(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 15 - Conviction for possession of narcotic drugs - Appellant convicted and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 25,000/- for possession of 11.5 kg of Poppy Husk - Evidence of police officials deemed credible despite absence of independent witnesses - Minor discrepancies in witness statements do not undermine prosecution case - Compliance with Sections 52 and 55 of the NDPS Act upheld. (Paras 1, 6, 70, 72)

(B) Evidence - Credibility of witnesses - Testimonies of police officials can be accepted even without independent corroboration - Minor contradictions in statements do not affect core of prosecution case. (Paras 60, 62)

(C) Sentencing - Deterrent sentence necessary for drug-related offences - Sentence of two years upheld as not excessive. (Paras 72, 73)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was apprehended by police while carrying a blue bag containing 11.5 kg of Poppy Husk. The police conducted a search after the appellant attempted to flee upon seeing them. The evidence was primarily from police officials, with no independent witnesses present.

Findings of Court:
The court found the testimonies of police officials consistent and credible, ruling out the possibility of false implication.

Issues: The main issues included the credibility of police witnesses, the significance of minor discrepancies, and the adequacy of the sentence imposed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the absence of independent witnesses does not invalidate the prosecution case, and minor discrepancies do not undermine the overall credibility of the evidence.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order of sentence dated 23.09.2010 passed by learned Special Judge, Una, District Una, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the appellant (accused before the learned Trial Court) was convicted of the commission of an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘NDPS Act’) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years, pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorousimprisonment for six months for the commission of aforesaid offence. (The 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 15 of the NDPS Act. It was asserted that HC Sanjay Kumar (PW-10), HC Ranjit Singh (PW-1), HHC Mohinder Singh (not examined), and Constable Gurdiyal Singh (PW-2) were present at Chhetran on a link road leading from Kungrat to Bidarwal Chowk on 10.08.2009 in a private vehicle. The accused was coming from Bidarwal Chowk carrying with him a blue bag (Ext.P-1). The accused returned after seeing the headlight of the vehicle and started walking briskly. HC Sanjay Kumar (PW-10) apprehended him with the help of accompanying police officials. The accused revealed his name as Fuman Singh on enquiry. The police checked the bag being carried by the accused. One grey polythene bag containing Poppy Husk (Ext.P-2) was found in the blue bag. The place was lonely; the night was dark, and no vehicle or person was moving on the road. Hence, HC Sanjay Kumar (PW-10) weighed the Poppy Husk in the presence of police officials and found its weight to be 11 kg 500 grams. The Poppy Husk was put in the same polythene. The polythene was put in the blue bag, and the bag (Ext.P-1) was sealed with one seal impression of seal ‘J’. The seal impression (Ext. PA) was taken on separate pieces of cloth. NCB-I Form (Ext.PW-7/A was filled in triplicate. A seal impression was put on the NCB-I form. The seal was handed over to HC Ranjit Singh (PW-1) after its use. The bag (Ext.P-1) was seized vide memo (Ext. PB). HC Ranjit Singh (PW-1) prepared the Rukka (Ext. PD) and handed it over to Constable Gurdyal Singh (PW-2) with directions to take it to Police Station Haroli. Constable Gurdyal Singh (PW-2) handed over the rukka to ASI Karam Chand (PW-6), who got the F.I.R. (Ext.PW-6/A) registered in the Police Station and handed over the case file to Constable Gurdyal Singh with the direction to carry it to the spot. HC Sanjay Kumar (PW-10) conducted the investigation on the spot. He prepared the site plan (Ext.PW-10/A). He arrested the accused vide memo (Ext.PW-10/B) and recorded the statements of witnesses as per their version. He produced the accused, case file and case property before ASI Karam Chand (PW-6) on 11.08.2009 at 4:10 a.m. ASI Karam Chand (PW-6) resealed the bag with a seal impression of ‘S’. He obtained the sample seal (Ext.PW-6/B) on a separate piece of cloth and NCB-I form. He filled the relevant column of the NCB-I form. He handed over the NCB-I form, sample seal, and case property to MHC Santosh Kumar (PW-7). He deposited all the articles in the Malkhana and made an entry in the Register of Malkhana. He handed over the case property, sample seal, docket, copy of F.I.R. and NCB-I form to HHC Jagdev Chand (PW-8) with the direction to carry them to SFSL Junga vide RC No. 205 of 2009.. HHC Jagdev Chand (PW-8) deposited all the articles at SFSL Junga and handed over the receipt to HC Santosh Kumar (PW-7) on his return. HC Sanjay Kumar (PW-10) sent Reasons of Belief (Ext.PE) to the Superintendent of Police, Una, through Constable Gurdyal Singh (PW-2). He sent the Special Report (Ext. PC) to the Sup