Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 1318

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, ROMESH VERMA, JJ.
State of H.P - Appellant
Versus
Kanshi Ram & Another – Respondents
Cr. Appeal No. 346 of 2015
Decided On : 29-10-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. J. S .Guleria, Deputy Advocate General.
For the Respondents:Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate.

Appeal against acquittal under NDPS Act dismissed due to prosecution lapses including no independent witnesses, material contradictions in evidence, sample weight variations, and chain of custody gaps; limited appellate interference unless perverse.

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 20 read with 29 - Recovery of narcotic substance during patrol - Accused acquitted by trial Court due to lack of independent witnesses, contradictions in time of apprehension, mode of patrol, sample packaging details, variation in sample weights reported by FSL, discrepancy with progress report on total quantity recovered, missing links in chain of custody and deposit procedures - Appeal against acquittal dismissed as trial Court's view plausible and not perverse. (Paras 35-46)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378 - Scope of appellate interference in acquittal appeals - Full power to review evidence but double presumption of innocence; interfere only if patent perversity, misreading of material evidence, or only guilt-consistent view possible - Reluctance to disturb unless glaring defects. (Paras 31-34)

Facts of the case:
Police party on patrol in government vehicle or on foot apprehended two persons carrying polythene bags who fled on sighting officials; each bag contained black sticky substance identified as charas weighing 1 kg 50 gms; 25 gms samples each sealed in cigarette packets or match boxes; no independent witnesses associated; official testimonies conflicted on timings, efforts for witnesses, presence of superior officer; defense suggested false implication at rest house; trial Court acquitted; State appealed.

Findings of Court:
Prosecution failed to prove conscious possession, recovery integrity, and compliance with procedural safeguards; evidentiary infirmities rendered case unreliable beyond reasonable doubt.

Issues: Whether prosecution established guilt under NDPS provisions; propriety of trial Court's acquittal evaluation; scope of High Court interference.

Ratio Decidendi: Prosecution must prove exclusive conscious possession and unbroken chain of evidence; contradictions in official accounts, absence of independent corroboration, sample discrepancies, and unexamined key witnesses vitiate case; acquittal upheld if reasonable doubt persists and trial view possible.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. appeal against ndps acquittal for charas possession. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. limited interference in appeals against acquittal. (Para 7 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
3. raiding party testimonies reveal recovery contradictions. (Para 8 , 9 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. incomplete chain of custody for seized contraband. (Para 10 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
5. defense alleges false implication by police. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)
6. prosecution fails due to evidentiary contradictions. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 43)
7. acquittal upheld; proof beyond doubt required. (Para 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49)

JUDGMENT :

Romesh Verma, J.

The present appeal arises out of the judgment of acquittal as passed by the learned Special Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. on 10.03.2015, whereby the present respondents have been acquitted in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 2009, under Section 20 read with Section 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short ‘NDPS Act’) in FIR No. 199 of 2008 dated 18th December, 2008 registered at Police Station, Karsog, District Mandi, H.P.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.12.2008, SI/SHO Vijay Sain was on patrol duty in a Government vehicle bearing No.HP33-8179 alongwith the Driver Jitender Kumar, HC Puran Chand, HC Tek Chand, Constable Mahender Singh and Constable Netar Singh in order to detect the crime on account of illegal activities. In the meantime, from Bhadala side, at about 4:50 P.M. in the evening two persons were seen while carrying plastic bag in their right hand. They tried to flee on seeing the police officials and thereafter the police officials on the basis of suspicion that they must be indulging in some illegal activity overpowered them. On asking both the persons disclosed their names as Kanshi Ram, S/O Atma Ram, Resident of Village Kot, P.O. Churag, Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi and Hari Om, S/O Kesari Ram, R/O Village Churag, Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. The aforesaid accused persons were given an option whether they wanted to be searched by some Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate and before the Police Officials, but they consented to be searched by the police party at the spot. The police officials gave their search to the accused persons and in the meantime the independent witnesses were also tried to be found on the spot. However, being a forest area no independent witness was found on the spot. On search, Kanshi Ram was found carrying a polythene bag in his right hand and on the said bag “ACQUAFINA” was written in which some substance was found and on the basis of experience, it was found to be charas. On weighing on the spot, it was found to be 1 kg 50 gms charas. 25-25 gram each of the substance was separated for the purpose of sample and was kept in two different foursquare cigarette packets and was packed in a white cloth with six seal impression “T”. Similarly, from Hari Om the narcotic substance weighing 1 kg 50 grams was found in a polythene packet and same was also separated comprising of 25-25 grams each for the purpose of sample and both the substances were kept in two different foursquare cigarette packets and thereafter they were wrapped in a white cloth. The NCB form in triplicate was prepared and case under Section 20 read with Section 29 of NDPS Act was found to have been committed by the present respondents.

3. On completion of investigation, the police presented the challan against the accused persons in the Court for the offence punishable under read with of ND& PS Act.

4. During the trial before the learned court below, accused persons (respondents herein) were charged for offences punishable under Section 20 read with Section 29 of ND& PS Act., to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed Trial.

5. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution has examined nine witnesses in all. Thereafter, respondents/ accused persons were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. They denied all the incriminating materi