2011(2) RCR(Cri) 660
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
A.N.JINDAL, J.
Shashi Atwal and another -Appellants
Versus
State of Punjab -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.64-SB of 2008(O&M)
Decided on: September 08, 2010
Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act - Possession - Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - [Section 15]
Fact of the Case:
The accused, both Assistant Sub Inspectors of the Punjab Police, were found in possession of poppy husk. They were convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fined. The accused pleaded false implication due to personal disputes and lack of incriminating evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the possession of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It highlighted discrepancies in witness testimonies, lack of evidence of exclusive possession, and tampering with case property. The court also considered the accused's defense regarding false implication and lack of corroborative evidence.
Issues: The issues included lack of evidence of possession, discrepancies in witness testimonies, and the accused's defense of false implication.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for corroborative evidence in cases involving police officials and the requirement to prove possession beyond reasonable doubt. It also highlighted the importance of exclusive possession and the need to address discrepancies in case property handling.
Final Decision: The appeal was accepted, the accused were acquitted, and the impugned judgment was set aside. The court ordered the accused to be set at liberty and any deposited fines to be refunded.
A.N.JINDAL, J.-
1. Shashi Atwal and Surender Singh, both Assistant Sub Inspectors of the Punjab Police were prosecuted for allegedly having been found in possession of two bags of poppy husk. Consequently, they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.one lac, each.
The allegations, which emerge from the prosecution case are that on 8.7.2000, Inspector Balwinder Singh along with other police officials, including Sub-Inspector Janak Singh (not examined), in-charge of Police Post Civil Lines, Bathinda was holding `nakabandhi' i.e, picket at Bus Stand Fauzi Chowk, Bathinda, where, Sub-Inspector Janak Singh received a secret information to the effect that ASI Surender Singh, working as Cashier in Police Lines, Bathinda was storing poppy husk in a rented house (of Kaur Singh) at Bibiwala Road and he used to bring the poppy husk from outside and sell the same to the customers and he could be apprehended red-handed. On the basis of the aforesaid secret information, Inspector Balwinder Singh sent ruqa (Ex.PB) through C.Tarsem Singh, on the basis of which formal First Information Report (Ex.PB/1) was registered at Police Station Kotwali Bathinda. Inspector Balwinder Singh sent the message to ASP P.K.Rai, who also reached the place of information i.e. Fauzi Chowk. After apprising him of the information, he along with other police officials, including ASP P.K.Rai and after associating PW Gurtej Singh, an independent witness, reached the disclosed place i.e. the rented house, allegedly owned by Kaur Singh. When they reached near the gate of the house, accused Surender Singh was seen sewing the gunny bag, whereas, accused Shashi Atwal was standing near him. On seeing the police party, both of them fled away from the scene. Inspector Balwinder Singh, on checking of the gunny bag, being sewned as well as another bag lying nearby, found to be containing poppy husk. On weighment, each gunny bag containing poppy husk came to be 30 kilograms. Both the bags were marked as Sr.No.1 and 2 and samples of 250 grams from each bag were taken out. Thereafter, the bags as also the sample parcels were sealed by Inspector Balwinder Singh with his seal bearing impression `BS'. Sample seal was also prepared separately. The case property was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PA. The Investigating Officer prepared the rough site plan, recorded the statements of the witnesses and on return to the Police Station Kotwali Bathinda, Inspector Balwinder Singh produced the case property before Inspector Mohinder Kumar, who after affixing his seal bearing impression `MK' on the case property as well as the sample seal chit, took the same into possession vide memo Ex.PD. On the same day, the case property was produced before Ilaqa Magistrate with an application (Ex.PF), who vide order Ex.PF/1 verified the case property. On 19.7.2000, the samples were sent to the office of the Chemical examiner, Patiala, who vide his report Ex.PZ found the same to be `poppy husk'. Thereafter, a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was presented against the accused.
3. Finding a prima facie case against the accused, they were charged for offence under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity `the Act'), to which they pleaded not guilty and opted to contest. In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined P.K.Rai, Superintendent of Police (PW1), Inspector Balwinder Singh (PW2), Inspector Mohinder Kumar (PW3), Constable Manjit Singh (PW4), Sub-Inspector Dinesh Kumar (PW5), Gurtej Singh (PW6), Head Constable Karamjit Singh (PW7), Assistant Sub Inspector Malkiat Singh (PW8), Head Constable Baldesh Singh (PW9), Assistant Sub Inspector Hukam Chand (PW10), Head Constable Santokh Singh (PW11), Assistant Sub Inspector Sukhdev Singh (PW12), Head Constable Bhag Singh (PW13), Head Constable Rai Bahadur Singh (PW14) and Assistant Sub Inspector Angrej S
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.