SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(P&H) 292

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.P. Nagrath
CRA-S No. 853-SB of 2000
Kulwant Singh & Anr.
v.
State of Punjab
{Decided on 09/04/2014}

Advocates:
For the Appellants:Mr. Paramjit Singh Brar, Advocate and Mr. Baltej Singh Sidhu, Advocate, Mr. Jaswant Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. B.S. Cheema, DAG, Punjab.

Headnote:Narcotics--Case Property--On return to the police station the case property not handed over to the SHO-Incharge of the Police Station--Accused acquitted.

       (A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.15--Seal--Acquittal--After use, seal was handed over to ASI even though independent witness was joined and present there--Neither ASI nor independent witness were examined—Though, non-examination is itself is not a defect but on cumulative effect of entire evidence, it assumed significance--Accused Acquitted. (Para 18)

       (B) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Ss.52 & 57--Case Property--Acquittal--Held, that it is true that provision of Section 52 & 57 are directory and violation of these provisions would not ipso facto violate the trial or conviction--However, Investigating Officer cannot totally ignore these provisions and such failure will have a bearing on appreciation of evidence regarding arrest of the accused or seizure of the article. (Para 27)

       (C) Evidence Act, 1872--Affidavits--Affidavits of formal witnesses were not bearing seal of the court before which the affidavit was sworn--Such affidavit is no affidavit in the eyes of law. (Para 30)

       (D) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.55--Case Property--Acquittal--It was required that on return to the police station the case property should have been handed over to the SHO-Incharge of the Police Station in order to comply with Section 55 of the Act to say that apart from the seal of investigating officer, it was also bearing another seal to ensure there is no scope of tempering--Accused acquitted because of non-compliance of this provision. (Para 24)

JUDGMENT

Mr. R.P. Nagrath, J.:- This is an appeal against the conviction of appellants recorded by the Judge, Special Court under Section 15 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the Act’). Being commercial quantity, appellants were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.1 lac, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each.

2. The version of prosecution is that on 04.05.1994, police party headed by Inspector Teja Singh, SHO of Police Station Kotwali, Bathinda was present at Naruana road in connection with checking of vehicles. Chand Singh son of Kala Singh a private witness was also present with the police party. Major Singh DSP City Bathinda came there and was issuing instructions with regard to checking of the vehicles. In the meanwhile, the police party saw Truck No. PB-03-2808 coming from Naruana side at a fast speed. Inspector Teja Singh stopped the vehicle with the help of other officials. The driver and other occupant of the truck sitting in cabin, tried to run away. Kulwant Singh-appellant No. 1, the driver was apprehended at the spot but his accomplice managed to escape.

3. Search of the truck was conducted by Inspector Teja Singh in the presence of DSP Major Singh. The truck was found loaded with four bags containing 32 kgs. of poppy-husk each. 100 gms. of poppy-husk from each of these bags were separated as samples. The samples and remaining gunny bags each containing 30 kgs. 900 gms. of poppy-husk were prepared into parcels sealed with seal bearing impression ‘TS’ of the Inspector. Seal after use was handed over to ASI Dinesh Kumar.

4. The case property was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PA attested by other police officials, the DSP and also Chand Singh PW. The truck was also taken into possession vide separate memo Ex. PB. Ruqa Ex. PD was sent to the Police Station and formal FIR Ex. PD/1 was registered. Rough sketch Ex. PE of the place of recovery was also prepared.

5. All the four sample parcels were sent for analysis to the office of Chemical Examiner and the contents were found to be poppyHead vide report Ex. PK.

6. Bhura Singh-appellant No. 2 was arrested on 18.05.1994 by PW-2 Manohar Lal Inspector, then posted as Additional SHO of Police Station Kotwali, Bathinda. After the challan was presented a charge was framed against both the appellants for offence under Section 15 of the Act.

7. The prosecution examined four witnesses in support of its case.

8. The appellants denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against them and pleaded false implication. Kulwant Singh-appellant No. 1 pleaded that the recovery was in fact made from Naresh Kumar and Rikhi Ram, owners of the truck but the appellant was falsely implicated by arresting him from his house. Bhura Singh-appellant No. 2 pleaded that he was not accompanying Kulwant Singh-appellant No. 1 nor anything was recovered from him. He was apprehended from his house in the presence of Piara Singh, ex-member panchayat and Amar Singh son of Arjan Singh and illegally detained in the police station. In defence Bhura Singh-appellant No. 2 examined Amar Singh as DW-1.

9. Learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforesaid.

10. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants, the State counsel and carefully perused the trial Court record.

11. The prosecution version with regard to recovery was testified by PW-1 Inspector Teja Singh Investigating Officer and PW-3 Major Singh, Superintendent of Police (Operations), who was then posted as DSP. Four bags of poppy-husk which were prepared into sealed parcels were produced as Ex. P-2 to P-5 during examination of PW-1. Both these witnesses stated that sample seal was also prepared separately as Ex. P-1 at the spot which was affixed on the report of Chemical Examiner.

12. PW-3/A Inspector Gurjant Singh then posted as SHO of the police station recorded th


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top