The High Court affirmed that, in chance recovery cases, compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act is not mandatory, reinforcing the credibility of police testimony despite the absence of independent witnesses.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 14.08.2013 passed by learned Special Judge, Kullu, District Kullu (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondents (accused before learned Trial Court) were acquitted of the commission of offences punishable under Section 20 read with Section 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act (hereinafter referred to as ND&PS Act) and Section 25 of ARMS ACT . (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 offences punishable under Section 20 read with Section 29 of ND&PS Act and Section 25 of the ARMS ACT . It was asserted that Inspector Mahesh Kumar (PW13), ASI Mukesh Kumar (PW11), HC Jawala Singh and Constable Tarsem Lal (PW12) were present at a distance of 2 kms from Chharod Nala bridge towards Manikaran on 08.05.2010 in the official vehicle bearing registration No. HP34A-9986 which was being driven by Constable Baldev Singh. A vehicle bearing registration No. HR-12C-3654 came from Manikaran at about 8:15 PM. Two persons were sitting in the vehicle beside the driver. The police demanded the documents of the vehicle and driving license of the driver. The driver produced the driving license of Anuj Kumar. The driver also revealed his name as Anuj Kumar. The person sitting beside the driver revealed his name as Pardeep Kumar and the person sitting on the rear seat revealed his name as Pradeep Saini. The registration certificate was found to be issued in the name of Naveen Mahanto. The pollution under control certificate and insurance were found to be in the name of Ashok. Accused Pardeep Kumar revealed that he had purchased the vehicle some days ago and had not got the ownership transferred in his name. The occupants appeared to be frightened. The police suspected that they were transporting some contraband. The police checked the vehicle and found two bags on the rear seat which were containing personal belongings. The driver was asked to open the dickey of the vehicle. All the accused said that the dickey was defective and could not be opened. Inspector Mahesh Kumar (PW13) tried to open the dickey and the dickey started opening. The police waited for an independent person but no one arrived on the spot. HC Jawala Singh and Inspector Mukesh Kumar (PW11) were associated as witnesses and the dickey of the car was opened in their presence. The mat in the dickey was found to be disturbed from its original position. The mat was removed and two screws were found to be loose. They were opened and a black bag was recovered. The police checked the bag and found six packets wrapped in a Khaki Cello Tape. The cello tape was removed and 14 packets of transparent polythene containing the black substance were recovered. One packet had black sticks, four packets had black pancakes and nine packets had black substance in the form of Aam Papad. Inspector Mahesh Kumar (PW13) smelled the black substance and found it to be charas. Charas was weighed and its weight was found to be 1 kg 880 grams. The charas and cello tape were put in the bag from which they were recovered. The bag was put in a cloth parcel and the parcel was sealed with six impressions of seal ‘A’. The specimen seal was taken on a separate piece of cloth. NCB-1 Form (Ext.PW5/G) was filled and a seal impression was put on the form. The charas, documents of the vehicle and key were seized wide memo (Ext. PW11/A).