The prosecution must establish the recovery of contraband beyond a reasonable doubt, and any missing link evidence can lead to the acquittal of the accused.

1. Appellants-Sudarshan Bakaya aged 80 years and his wife Pushpa Devi alias Moong Phali aged 70 years (hereinafter to be referred as `accused') stand convicted under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter for short to be referred to as `the Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each and to pay a find of Rs.1 lac each, in default thereof to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each. They are stated to be in custody since the date of their conviction and also remained in custody as under trial prisoner for about 13-14 months.

2. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 15.09.1997, PW Mohd. Hussain Malik, the then Dy. SP (Bakshi Nagar Range) was on patrol duty, when at about 6 p.m. he received an information to the effect that both the accused who used to indulge in purchase and sale of charas, were keeping some charas in their residence. Finding the information to be reliable, he requisitioned the services of PW Kailash Chibber, the then SHO Police Station Bakshi Nagar and the police officials of Police Post Sarwal. He then raided the house of the accused in presence of two independent witnesses namely Amrit Lal and Ravinder Paul, in which one kilogram and 50 grams of charas kept in the polythene from the bed of the accused was recovered. 50 grams of charas was extracted as sample and was sealed. The case of the prosecution is that it was handed over to the SHO at the spot. Recovery memo EXPW-MH was prepared in this regard by Mohd. Hussain Malik Dy. SP, which was also counter signed by the aforesaid two independent witnesses. A docket was sent to the Police Station Bakshi Nagar from the spot itself for the registration of a case, where upon a formal F.I.R. No. 238/1997 under Section 20 of the Act was registered against the accused. The sample was sent to the FSL and after the completion of the investigation, the challan was presented against both the accused under Section 20 of the Act, whereupon they were charged for the said offence.

3. The prosecution, in support of its case, has examined Tilak Raj SGC No. 794 who is a witness to the recovery, Dy. SP Mohd. Hussain Malik, the main investigating officer of the case, Mohd. Rashid Shaheen- Naib Tehsildar before whom the sample was produced for re-sealing and Kailash Chibber the then SHO Police Station Bakshi Nagar. Beside this, report of Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) was also placed on record. It needs to be mentioned that it is not formally proved.

4. So far as aforesaid two independent witnesses are concerned, it is admitted before me by Mr. P. C. Sharma, learned State counsel and is otherwise borne out from record also that Ravinder Paul was given up as his whereabouts were not known, whereas Amrit Lal was given up as not necessary.

5. Defence set up by both the accused is of their false implication simplicitor. However, no evidence was led by them.

6. Finding the case of the prosecution to be proved, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced both the accused as indicated hereinabove vide impugned judgment dated 29.07.2004. Hence, this appeal.

7. I have heard Mr. Sunil Sethi, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Vishal Mahajan, Advocate, representing both the accused and Mr. P. C. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General. With their assistance, I have also gone through the trial Court record minutely.

8. Mr. Sethi at the very outset submits that in fact no recovery was effected from the accused as alleged and they have been falsely implicated. He contends that simply that Dy. SP, a senior police official was the person who was heading the raiding party and has projected himself as investigating officer of this case, that fact by itself cannot be said to be enough to believe the case of the prosecution as proved when it is otherwise stumbling badly on account of certain vital weaknesses in it. Mr. Sethi goes on to say that in order to give sanctity to the search, Dy. SP has shown th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document