IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, SATYEN VAIDYA, JJ.
State of Himachal Pradesh - Appellant.
Versus
Chaman Lal and another - Respondents.
Criminal Appeal No.272 of 2012.
Decided on : 13-12-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of prosecution's case against respondents. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. prosecution’s credibility questioned due to procedural discrepancies. (Para 8 , 22 , 23 , 25) |
| 3. inconsistencies in police witness testimonies diminish prosecution's case. (Para 24) |
| 4. questionable actions of police lead to doubts about evidence handling. (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 5. unclear seals imply uncertainty about evidence connection. (Para 32 , 34) |
| 6. presumption of innocence upheld; acquittal affirmed. (Para 36 , 37) |
JUDGMENT :
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.
The respondents have been acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short ‘ND&PS Act’) by the learned Special Judge and, aggrieved thereby, the State has filed the instant appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 22.03.2010 at about 11.30 p.m., Inspector Baldev Thakur, the then S.H.O., Police Station, Darlaghat, LHC Kamla Devi, HHC Ram Lal, Constable Mast Ram and driver Sunil Kumar along with an official vehicle had set up a ‘naka’ at Darla Chowk. At about 11.30 p.m., an Alto Car (A/F) of black colour came from the Police Station, Darlaghat side which was singalled to stop and a gunny bag was found lying on the backseat of the car. On being asked, the driver of the vehicle disclosed his name as Chaman Lal (respondent No.1) and another person occupying the front useat disclosed his name as Har Pal Singh (respondent No.2). They were asked to show the papers of the vehicle. The driver of the vehicle agreed to show the documents but instead of showing the same, his driver i.e. respondent No.1 drove thhe vehicle towards Chhamla. The police party chased the vehicle with the official vehicle. At a place known as ‘Dori Ki Bawri’, when the police party was about to apprehend the vehicle, respondent No.2 threw the gunny bag out of the moving car. The said bag on search was found to be containing poppy straw. However, since no independent witness was available, therefore, HHC Ram Lal was deputed to bring scale from Darlaghat. Accordingly, HHC Ram Lal brought an electronic scale and then poppy straw that was recovered was weighed and found to be 15 Kg 600 grams. The gunny bag was packed in a white colour bag and sealed with 9 seals of capital ‘A’. NCB forms in triplicate were filled in on the spot. Facsimile of seal ‘A’ was taken on NCB form. Sample seal was separately taken on a piece of cloth and seal after use was handed over to LHC Kamla. Ruka was scribed and sent to the police station through HHC Ram Lal on the basis of which FIR No.31 dated 23.03.2010 was registered at Police Station, Darlaghat. The spot was inspected and site plan was accordingly prepared. The police party started the search for the vehicle as well as respondents. The black colour Alto Caur was found parked outside the house of respondent Chaman Lal, who handed over the keys of the car to the police. When the car was opened, it was emitting smell of poppy straw and little dust of poppy straw was found to be lying on the bahckseat of the car. Respondent No.1 was arrested and he disclosed that the car was owned by Chinta Lal. The car was taken into possession by the police. The case property was deposited with the MHC. Special report of the case was sent to the SDPO, Darlaghat. Respondent No.2 was arrested on 02.05.2010. Documents of the vehicle were taken into possession by the police. The case property was sent to Laboratory for chemical examination and recovered poppy straw on chemical examination was opined to be sample of poppy straw.
3. After completion of the entire formalities, challan against the respondents was submitted in the Court. They were, later on, charged with the commission of offence punishable under Section 15 of the ND&PS Act on 02.04.2011 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the respondents examined 16 witnesses in total and thereafter closed its evidence. The respondents w
In appeals against acquittal, the presumption of innocence remains unless the lower court's findings are demonstrably perverse or unreasonable.
Non-association of independent witnesses in NDPS recovery at public place with traffic and habitation, absent genuine effort, coupled with inconsistencies and procedural lapses, warrants acquittal gi....
The court reaffirmed that in narcotic cases, the prosecution bears a heavy burden of proof, and any reasonable doubt resulting from discrepancies leads to acquittal.
The court upheld the acquittal of the respondent under the NDPS Act due to significant inconsistencies in testimonies and doubts regarding the credibility of evidence presented by the prosecution.
Pre-search consent memo mentioning specific NDPS section infers post-recovery fabrication; contradictions in police testimonies, failure to secure independent witnesses near populated area, and lack ....
Point of Law : The purpose of Section 52-A is to provide a mechanism, whereby there is no misuse of the contraband recovered by the authorities and the same is kept in safe custody and/or destroyed w....
Appeal against acquittal under NDPS Act: Interference only if trial court's view perverse or impossible; here, witness inconsistencies, procedural lapses justify upholding acquittal.
The principles relating to interference by the High Court in appeals against acquittal are well settled. While High Court can review entire evidence and reach its own conclusions, it will not interfe....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.