The importance of compliance with statutory provisions of law and the need for evidence to inspire confidence in cases involving heavy punishment.

Pritam Pal, J.

1. Appellant Hawa Singh has brought this appeal against judgment dated 10.8.2002 and order dated 12.8.2002 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Hisar, whereby he was convicted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act), and then sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years with a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was further ordered to undergo R.I. for six months.

2. In nut-shell, the facts culminating to the commencement of this appeal may be capitulated thus :-

On 23.3.2001, in the after-noon, Raj Singh ASI (PW-4) along with other police officials, was present in connection with patrol duty near village Chuli Bagrian in the area of Police Station, Adampur. At about 4.30 p.m., the appellant was seen coming from the side of village Chuli Kalan, who, on seeing the police party, sat on the pretext of urinating. At that time, he was carrying a plastic bag on his head. On suspicion, he was apprehended by Raj Singh ASI, who is the Investigating Officer and gave notice Ex. PE for search of his bag to be conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, but he reposed confidence in the Investigating Officer vide reply notice Ex. PE/1. Then, he (the Investigating Officer) searched the bag of the appellant, as a result of which, 20 kg. of poppy husk, was recovered, out of which, 100 grams was taken out a sample which was made into parcel and sealed with the seal of `RS. The remaining bulk of poppy husk and the sample were taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PF. Thereafter, ruqa Ex. PB was sent to the Police Station for registration of the case, on the basis of which formal FIR Ex. PB/1 was recorded. In the meantime, the Investigating Officer completed all other formalities of the case at the spot.

3. On return to the Police Station, the accused and the case property were produced before Kapoor Singh SI/SHO and thereafter, the case property was deposited with the MHC. On receipt of the report Ex. PD with regard to the sample sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban, and completion of formal investigation in this case, the appellant was challaned for commission of offence under Section 15 of the Act.

4. The appellant was charge-sheeted under Section 15 of the Act, by the learned Court vide its order dated 4.7.2001, to which he pleaded `not guilty and claimed trial.

5. The prosecution in order to subordinate its case examined as many as five witnesses, namely, PW-1, Constable Randhir Singh; PW-2 SI/SHO Kapoor Singh; PW-3 HC Dalip Singh; PW-4 ASI Raj Singh, Investigating Officer and PW-5 HC Sunder Lal.

6. After closure of the prosecution case, the appellant was examined in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he denied all the incriminating evidence appearing against him. When he was called upon to enter his defence, he chose in the negative.

7. The learned trial Court after appraisal of the evidence brought on record and hearing the learned counsel for the parties, convicted and sentenced the appellant, as indicated in the opening part of this judgment. This is how feeling aggrieved, the appellant has come up in this appeal before this Court.

8. I have heard Mr. Arvind Kashyap, learned Amicus-curiae, appearing on behalf of the appellant, Mr. Man Mohan Sikka, learned AAG, appearing on behalf of the State of Haryana and have perused the entire case file carefully.

9. The noticeable points of arguments raised on behalf of the appellant in this case are that no independent witness was joined in this case by the Investigating Officer at the time of effecting the recovery and that at the time of investigation, no compliance was made as required under Section 55 of the Act and that no second sample out of the case property was taken by the Investigating Officer. Besides that, learned Amicus-curiae also pointed out some contradictions in the statements of the police witnesses, namely PW-3 HC Dalip