Back
2020 Supreme(P&H) 1308
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Jitendra Chauhan, Archana Puri, JJ.
State Of Punjab - Appellant
Versus
Laddi - Respondent
CRM-A-2731-MA-2018 (O&M)
Decided On : 21-01-2020
Mr. A.A. Pathak, Addl. AG Punjab for the appellant-State.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove conscious possession of narcotic substances and the importance of consistent and reliable evidence.
Headnote:
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances - Acquittal - Sections 21 and 22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Sections 21 and 22 of NDPS Act, 1985 - The court discussed the conscious possession of the accused, the delay in sending the sample to the FSL, and discrepancies in the statements of prosecution witnesses. The judgment highlighted the lack of evidence regarding the accused's knowledge of the intoxicating substance and the discrepancies in the prosecution's case.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was acquitted of charges under Sections 21 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, after the prosecution failed to prove conscious possession of the narcotic substance and encountered discrepancies in the evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was a lack of evidence regarding the accused's knowledge of the intoxicating substance and discrepancies in the prosecution's case, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Issues: The issues revolved around the conscious possession of the accused, delay in sending the sample to the FSL, and discrepancies in the statements of prosecution witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The lack of evidence regarding the accused's knowledge of the intoxicating substance and the discrepancies in the prosecution's case led to the acquittal of the accused.
Final Decision: The application for condonation of delay and the application seeking leave to appeal were dismissed, and the judgment of acquittal was upheld.
JUDGMENT
Jitendra Chauhan, J. - This is an application for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 04.01.2018 passed by Judge, Special Court, Amritsar, vide which the accused/respondent was acquitted of the charge in FIR No. 123 dated 25.09.2013 registered under Sections 21 and 22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, 1985 at Police Station Chatiwind, District Amritsar.
2. The brief facts of the case as noticed in the judgment passed by the trial Court in paragraph No. 8 are reproduced as under:-
"8. In the present case, in order to prove the recovery of intoxicating powder from accused Laddi, prosecution has examined Investigating Officer of the case ASI Balwinder Singh as PW3 who has stated that on 15.9.2013 he was posted as Incharge Police Post Daburji and he alongwith police party was on private vehicles and laid a picket at the turn of bridge of drain Bhagtupura and they were checking the vehicles. In the course of their checking two clean shaven persons came from the side of Mehma Pandori on a motor cycle. On seeing the police party, they perplexed. The pillion rider of the motor cycle threw away something. They were apprehended. On query driver of the motor cycle told his name as Laddi and person sitting pillion told his name as Shiva. The driver failed to show ownership record of the motor cycle bearing no.PB09-E-5117. He tried to join public witness before checking the thrown material but no one was ready. On checking the poly bag, it was found to contain intoxicating powder. He took out 10 grams of the intoxicating powder and put the same in a plastic container, prepared sample parcel. The bulk on weighing comes out to be 390 grams and separate parcel of which was prepared. He put his seal having impression BS on the same. Form M29 was prepared. The seal after use was handed over to HC Nirmal Singh. Both the parcels, sample seal, form M29 were taken into police possession vide recovery memo Ex.Pl. Recovery memo of the motor cycle Ex.P2 was prepared. Thereafter Ex.P9 ruqa was sent in the hands ofHC Niral Singh on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PIO was registered. Form M29 Ex.P4 was prepared on which he put his seal at point 'A'. Rough site plan Ex.Pll was prepared. Accused was arrested vide separate arrest memo Ex.P12 and Ex.Pl3. Intimation was sent to the relatives. Personal search memo Ex.Pl4 and Ex.Pl5 were prepared, which were attested by HC Nirmal Singh and HC Sawinder Singh. On return he handed over both the parcels, form M29, sample seal chit alongwith accused to SHO Azad Davinder Singh, who put his seal impression of AS on sample parcel as well as bulk parcel and completed form M29. Handing over memoEx.P5 was prepared. On 26.9.2013 SHO after operating the double lock of the malkhana handed over parcels, sample seal chit and application Ex.P6 for producing the case property and accused before Illaqa Magistrate for conducting proceedings under section 52-A of NDPS Act. The Illaqa Magistrate passed order Ex.P 7 after withdrawing representative sample from the bulk weighing 10 grams and sealed the same with seal GKD and BS. Thereafter he handed over these parcels, sample seal to SHO who kept the same in the double lock. On 01.10.2013 SHO operated the double lock of police malkhana and handed over bulk parcel and representative parcel for depositing in judicial malkhana which he deposited vide receipt Ex.P8. Sample was sent to the FSL and report of FSL Ex.P 16 was received. Thereafter challan was presented."
3. After completion of investigation, challan/report under Section 173 Cr.P.C was presented in the Court.
4. Charge under Section 22 NDPS Act was framed against the accused to which the accused did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
5. In order to prove its case, the prosecution had examined PW-1 HC Sarwan Singh, PW2 HC Nirmal Singh, PW3 DSP Azad Davinder Singh, PW4 ASI Balwinder Singh and closed the evidence.
6. During pendency of trial, accused Shiva absented, therefore, he was declared as
