Back
2015 Supreme(P&H) 2270
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
DARSHAN SINGH, J.
RAJPAL – APPELLANT
Vs.
STATE OF HARYANA – RESPONDENT
CRA-S No. 1614-SB of 2004
Decided on : 10-12-2015
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Angel Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent:Ashok Muthreja, Advocate
The court emphasized the importance of complying with the mandatory provisions of the Act and considered the antecedents of the convict in determining the appropriate sentence.
Headnote:
Narcotic Drugs - Conviction under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 15
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was found in possession of 30 kilograms of poppy husk. He was convicted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Finding of the Court:
The court affirmed the conviction of the appellant and modified the sentence to two years of rigorous imprisonment.
Issues: Violation of mandatory provisions of Section 42, tampering with the sample parcel, discrepancies in witness statements, and reduction in the quantum of sentence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the secret information received by the Investigating Officer did not fall within the purview of Section 42 of the Act. It also held that the sample parcel was not tampered with and the delay in sending it to the FSL did not prejudice the accused. The court considered the antecedents of the convict and reduced the sentence to two years.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, affirming the conviction and modifying the sentence to two years of rigorous imprisonment.
Darshan Singh, J.
The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 19.07.2004, passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Panchkula, vide which accused-appellant Rajpal has been held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the order on the quantum of sentence of dated 21.04.2004, vide which the accused-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 06 months.
2. In nutshell, the allegations of the prosecution are that on 30.11.2002, ASI Mange Ram (the Investigating Officer of the case) along with other police officials, on receiving the secret information, proceeded towards Ramgarh Dhaba for conducting the raid. In the way, Telu Deen, Ex. Sarpanch resident of Tehna Distt. Panchkula met them and he was also joined in the raiding party. Meanwhile, the accused-appellant was seen coming from the side of Ramgarh road on foot carrying a bag (katta) on his shoulder. He was apprehended by the police officials. The Investigating Officer apprised the accused-appellant of his right to get his search conducted in the presence of any magistrate or a gazetted officer by serving the notice under Section 50 of the Act Ex.PC. The accused-appellant opted for his search to be conducted in the presence of a Magistrate. Ashwani Kumar Sharma, Tehsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate, Panchkula was informed through Constable Surinder Kumar and he reached at the spot. The contents of the bag were checked in the presence of Ashwani Kumar Sharma, Tehsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate and the witnesses, which led to the recovery of 30 kilograms of poppy husk. Two samples of 01 kilograms each were separated from the bulk. Separate sealed parcels of the sample parcels and residue were prepared and were sealed with the seals bearing impressions 'MS' and 'JS'. The seals were handed over to independent witness Telu Deen after use. The contraband was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PA. Investigating Officer sent the ruqqa Ex.PG, on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PG/1 was registered. The accused-appellant was arrested.
3. On return to the police station, the accused-appellant along with the case property and the witnesses were produced before SI Virender Kumar, SHO Police Station-Chandimandir, who verified the case property and put his seal 'VD' on all the three parcels. The case property in intact condition was deposited with the Mohrir Head Constable. The sample parcel was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban for examination. On receipt of the report of the FSL Ex.PF and on completion of formalities of investigation, report under Section 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') was presented in the Court.
4. The accused-appellant was charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 15 of the Act vide order dated 13.03.2003, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined as many as six witnesses.
6. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused-appellant pleaded that he is innocent. No recovery was effected from him. The alleged place of occurrence has been manipulated by the police. The alleged contraband was already lying in the police station and planted upon him, as there were other NDPS cases registered in the police station on that day and recovery of some other accused has been planted upon him.
7. Accused-appellant did not lead any defence evidence.
8. Appreciating the evidence on record and the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties, the accused-appellant was held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 15 of the Act and was awarded the sentence as mentioned in the upper part of the judg
