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

2017 Supreme(P&H) 1520

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J.
Buta Singh - Appellant
Vs.
State of Punjab - Respondent
CRA-S-3179-SB-2013 (O&M)
Decided On : 11-11-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate and Ms. Aditi Girdhar, Advocate, Ms. Gurpal Kaur Dulat, Legal Aid Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr. Amandeep S. Gill, Sr. DAG

The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, the procedure for drawing samples, and the conduct of the Investigating Officer in ensuring the credibility of the prosecution's evidence and upholding the rights of the accused.

Headnote:

NDPS Act - Conviction under Section 22 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) - The court discussed the compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, the procedure for drawing samples, and the conduct of the Investigating Officer. The court also referred to legal provisions such as the requirement to inform the accused of their rights under Section 50, the procedure for drawing samples, and the implications of non-compliance with these provisions.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted under Section 22 of the NDPS Act for possession of intoxicant tablets and Rexcof syrup. The case involved a secret informer's tip leading to the apprehension of the accused with a large quantity of intoxicant tablets and Rexcof syrup. The appellant claimed to be falsely implicated due to a complaint filed against a police officer. The defense presented evidence to support this claim.

Finding of the Court:

The court found merit in the appeal and acquitted the appellant. The court highlighted non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, discrepancies in the procedure for drawing samples, and the conduct of the Investigating Officer. The court also noted the failure to examine an independent witness and the delay in depositing the sealed parcels in the judicial malkhana.

Issues: The issues included the compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, the procedure for drawing samples, the conduct of the Investigating Officer, and the credibility of the prosecution's evidence in light of the defense's claims.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act, discrepancies in the procedure for drawing samples, and the conduct of the Investigating Officer. The failure to examine an independent witness and the delay in depositing the sealed parcels were also crucial factors in the court's decision.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, and acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 22 of the NDPS Act. The appellant was ordered to be released forthwith if not involved in any other case.

JUDGMENT :

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J.

1. Present appeal has been filed challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 05.09.2013 vide which the appellant was convicted under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac. In default of payment of fine, it was further ordered that he will undergo R.I. for one more year.

2. Before referring to the facts, it may be noticed that the present appeal was admitted vide order dated 23.09.2013 and legal aid counsel was also appointed in this case, as the appellant is in judicial lockup since the date of his conviction i.e. 05.09.2013.

3. As per the custody certificate dated 27.10.2017 filed by learned State counsel, the appellant has already undergone 03 years and 06 months of actual sentence and he is not involved in any such or similar case.

4. Brief facts of the case are that on 07.06.2016, SI/SHO Dalbir Singh along with other police officials, on an official jeep bearing registration No.PB-12F-0330, was going from Village Jhunir to Makhewala on patrol duty. When the police party reached near a telephone exchange in village Jhunir, a secret informer stopped them and told SI Dalbir Singh that one person namely Buta Singh son of Puran Singh, resident of Makhewala is in habit of selling intoxicant tablets and liquid i.e. Rexcof and he is coming from Makhewala to Jhunir for selling these intoxicant which he is carrying in a polythene bag and if a naka is held, large quantity of intoxicant tablets and Rexcof can be recovered from him. On the basis of secret information, a ruqa (information) was sent to police station through PHG Jagdev Singh for registration of case and directions were given to send the special report to senior officers. The naka (barricade) was held by SI Dalbir Singh along with other police officials on Jhunir-Makhewala road. One Ami Chand son of Lachhman Dass met the police party and he was joined by the police and they proceeded towards village Makhewala. When they reached near a cemented water channel, a person carrying a white polythene bag in his hand, in which intoxicant medicines and bottles were kept, was asked to stop, but he perturbed and tried to turn towards the fields. The police party apprehended him and he disclosed his name as Buta Singh son of Puran Singh. The white polythene bag was opened and intoxicant medicines were found in the same. On counting, the total number of tablets came out to be 22700 and out of those, 20 tablets were separated as sample. Similarly, on counting the bottles containing Rexcof, it came to 33 bottles and from these 33 bottles, one bottle was separated as sample. Thereafter, the bulk parcel and samples were separately prepared and sealed by the Investigating Officer with seal impression ‘DS’. The sample seal was prepared separately and after use, it was handed over to independent witness namely Ami Chand. The case property was also taken in possession by preparing separate recovery memo. The site was inspected and site plan was also prepared. Thereafter, statements of witnesses were recorded. The accused was arrested vide arrest memo and on receipt of report of FSL and completion of all other formalities, report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (‘Cr.P.C.’ for short) was submitted in the Court against the accused.

5. On submission of the challan, compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C. was made and finding a prima facie case, charge under Section 22 of NDPS Act was framed against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court for prosecution. The prosecution in evidence examined only three witnesses. PW1 HC Gurdeep Singh who is a formal witness, stated that on 16.06.2010, he was posted in Police Station Jhunir and he tendered his affidavit Ex.PA and stated that the same may be read as part of his statemen
































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top