The prosecution must prove conscious possession of contraband, and failure to frame alternative charges for transporting offensive goods without a permit can lead to acquittal.

R.S.Madan, J.

1. By this order, I will dispose of the three criminal appeals captioned above, which have arisen out of the common judgment dated 24.07.1999, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala in Sessions Case No. 239T of 12.1.1998, whereby he has convicted all the three accused u/s. 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter for brevity to be referred to as the Act), and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each and to pay an amount of Rs. 1,00,000.00 each. In default of payment of fine, they were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each.

2. In brief, the facts of the case are that on 17.10.1997 Inspector Rajbir Singh alongwith ASI Gurcharan Singh, HC Mehtab Singh and other police officials, held naka on the bridge of Bhakra Canal on the road towards village Paharpur where Reshwinder Singh, resident of Village Kheri came present and he was joined with the police party. In the meantime, truck bearing No. HR-07-6254 came from the side of bridge of Bhakra Canal towards Village Paharpur. The truck was stopped by Inspector Rajbir Singh. It was being driven by Gurbachan Singh accused while Dalbir Singh was sitting in, the centre and Baljinder Singh was sitting next to him. As Inspector Rajbir Singh had suspicion, he called Halqa DSP Pritpal Singh Thind, who immediately on receipt of message arrived at the spot. The identity of the accused was asked for and an option was given to them as to whether they wanted to be searched before a Magistrate but all the accused reposed confidence in him. Then their consent statement Ex. PC was recorded, which was signed by Gurbachan Singh accused and thumb marked by the other accused and attested by Rashwinder Singh PW, ASI Gurcharan Singh and DSP Pritpal Singh. Then on the directions of the DSP, Inspector Rajbir Singh conducted the search of the truck and found 40 bags of gram husk lying on the back side of the truck and 55 bags of poppy husk concealed ahead of those bags. The bags of poppy husk were numbered as Sr. No. 1 to 55 250 grams of poppy husk was separated as sample from each bag and the samples were also numbered, as per the number of the bags. On weighment each bag was found to have 30 kg of poppy husk. The samples were made into parcels. The sample parcels and the bags were then sealed with the seal bearing impression "PPS" of the DSP. Sample seal impression Ex. PE was also prepared. The seal after use was retained by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Pritpal Singh. The case property and the truck were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PD attested by the aforesaid witnesses. 40 bags of gram husk were also taken into possession vide memo Ex. PF. Ruqa Ex. PG was sent to the police station for the registration of the case by Inspector Rajbir Singh, on the basis of which formal FIR Ex. PG/1 was recorded by SI Gajjan Singh. Inspector Rajbir Singh prepared the rough site plan Ex. PH of the place of recovery with correct marginal notes and recorded the statements of the witnesses. After disclosing the grounds of arrest vide memo Ex. PJ, all the accused were arrested as they failed to produce any permit or licence for the possession of contraband bags of poppy husk. From the personal search of the accused Rs. 50.00 were recovered from Baljinder Singh, Rs.105 from Dalbir Singh and Rs. 86.00, driving licence and one challan chit from Gurbachan Singh accused, which were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PK1 to Ex. PK3. On return to the police station, Inspector Rajbir Singh deposited the case property with seals intact with the MHC Gurdev Singh and put the accused in the police lockup. On the next day, he produced the accused and the case property before the Ilaqa Magistrate. On receipt of report of the Chemical Examiner Ex. PM1 and completion of necessary investigation and other formalities, challan against the accused was presented in the Court.

3. The learned trial court