Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
INDERJIT SINGH, J.
Jaspal Singh Alias Pala – Appellant
Vs.
State of Punjab – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.S-1888-SB of 2016
Decided On : 09-03-2017
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Conviction under Section 22 - [Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 22] - The court found that the mandatory provisions under Section 50 of the NDPS Act had not been complied with, and the recovery had been effected from the hands of the accused, which amounted to recovery from the search of the person of the accused. The delay in sending the sample for such a long period was not explained, and there was no independent corroboration in the case. Therefore, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused/appellant by leading cogent evidence beyond doubt.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was apprehended by the police while attempting to discard a polythene bag containing intoxicant powder. The prosecution alleged that the accused was in possession of the intoxicant powder and charged him under Section 22 of the NDPS Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the mandatory provisions under Section 50 of the NDPS Act had not been complied with, and the recovery had been effected from the hands of the accused, which amounted to recovery from the search of the person of the accused. The delay in sending the sample for such a long period was not explained, and there was no independent corroboration in the case. Therefore, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused/appellant by leading cogent evidence beyond doubt.
Issues: Non-compliance with mandatory provisions under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, delay in sending the sample, and lack of independent corroboration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the recovery had been effected from the hands of the accused, and the mandatory provisions under Section 50 of the NDPS Act had not been complied with. The delay in sending the sample was not explained, and there was no independent corroboration in the case, leading to the failure of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused/appellant.
Final Decision: The criminal appeal was allowed, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of the charge as framed against him. The sentence of imprisonment was suspended, and the appellant was released on bail.
Inderjit Singh, J.
This criminal appeal has been filed by Jaspal Singh alias Pala -appellant challenging the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 8.4.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby the accused/appellant has been held guilty and convicted for the offence under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NDPS Act'). He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 22 of the Act.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case as mentioned in the judgment dated 8.4.2016 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar are as under:-
"In nutshell, facts as put forth by the prosecution in its case against the accused are that on 31.5.2014 I.O. SI Bikramjit Singh alongwith other police personnel were present at turning point Village Sarangara on private car Bearing No.PB02 BT 8507 in connection with patrolling and crime checking during which a person was seen coming from the side of Village Sarangara on foot and on seeing the police party sat at the left side of the road on the pretext of urinating and took out the polythene from the left pocket of his pant and tried to throw away a polythene bag in the fields but was apprehended by I.O. with the help of other police personnel. On being asked his name and identity he disclosed his name and identity as Jaspal Singh @ Palla. On checking the black coloured polythene bag it was found containing intoxicant powder out of which a sample weighing 10 gms. was separated and was put into a plastic container and remaining bulk portion was weighed which came out to be 100 gms. and was also put into a different plastic container alongwith polythene. Both the container were converted into parcels and were sealed by I.O. with his seal impression BS. Sample seals were prepared separately. Relevant portion of Form M29 was completed. Seal was handed over to HC Lakhwinder Singh after use. Both the parcels, sample seals and Form M29 were taken into possession vide memo Ex.P1 in the presence of HC Lakhwinder Singh and Ct. Karandeep Singh, Ruqa Ex.P2 was sent to police station on the basis of which FIR Ex.P3 was recorded by SI Didar Singh. I.O. prepared rough site plan Ex.P4 at the spot. Accused was arrested vide memo Ex.P5 and intimation regarding his arrest was given to his relatives in the presence of witness. During his personal search sum of Rs. 1200/- was recovered from the possession of the accused. Personal search Memo Ex.P6 was prepared in the presence of aforesaid witness. Statement of witnesses were recorded. On arrival to police station, I.O. produced the case property before Insp. Sikander Singh the then SHO P.S. Lopoke alongwith accused. After verifying the intactness of the seals on the parcels, SHO sealed the parcels with his impression SS, prepared his sample seals separately and after completion of relevant portion of Form M29, SHO kept the all in his double lock. Handing over memo to this effect is Ex.P7 which was attested by SHO Sikandar Singh. The case property was produced before the Area Magistrate for authentication and then the sample was sent to the office of chemical examiner for analysis."
3. After necessary investigation, the challan was presented in Court. On presentation of challan, the trial Court finding prima facie case against the accused-appellant framed charge for the offence under Sections 22 of the Act, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PW-1 SI Bikramjit Singh-Investigating Officer, who deposed regarding the investigation conducted in this case. PW-2 HC Lakhwinder Singh also deposed as per prosecution version regarding the recovery of 110 grams intoxicant powder. PW-3 Inspector Sikander Singh was post
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
