The requirement of proving charges beyond doubt in criminal prosecution.

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Vashisth, J. - Appellant - Daljit Singh @ Jit, then aged 44 years, has filed present appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.03.2004, passed by the Ld. Judge, Special Court, Patiala, in Sessions Case No. 97T of 24.04.2000/08.12.2003, arising out of FIR No.28, dated 29.01.2002, under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity, 'NDPS Act'), registered at Police Station Samana. Accused-appellant was held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 15 of NDPS Act, and was ordered to undergo sentence(s), as detailed in the following table:

The period of sentence already undergone by the accused- appellant was ordered to be set off, according to the provisions of Section 428 Cr.P.C.

2. Prosecution version as detailed in the impugned judgment is that 'on 29.01.2022, police party headed by SI Hans Raj, was present at Bhawanigarh Chowk, Samana, in connection with the Naka Bandi and patrolling duty. There, he received secret information that accused is in habit of Chura Poppy heads and if raid is conducted, he could be apprehended red handed. Believing this information to be correct, intimation Ex.PA (mentioned as ruqa in the impugned judgment) was sent to the police station through C. Sher Singh, and on its basis DDR No.17 was recorded and thereupon, formal FIR Ex.PA/1, was also recorded by SI Budh Ram. Thereafter, when the police party was going to conduct raid at the house of the accused, on the way of Majri Chowk, PW Labh Singh, Lambardar, met them and was joined in the police party. Thereafter, raid was conducted at the house of the accused, who was found present there. Accused was apprehended. From the personal search of the accused, a purse containing Rs.150/- and one wrist watch were recovered, and were taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PB, attested by witnesses. During interrogation of the accused, he suffered disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act Ex.PC, that he has kept concealed three bags containing poppy husk in the store of his house, about which only he had the knowledge and could get the same recovered. The Investigating Officer apprised the accused about his right to get the search conducted in presence of some Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, to which he replied that the search should be got conducted in presence of some Gazetted Officer. The dissent statement of accused Ex.PD, was recorded. Thereafter, on the basis of message already flashed to DSP Satvir Singh Atwal, Samana, he reached the spot and gave his introduction to the accused as DSP and Gazetted Officer. The accused reposed his confidence in him and agreed for his search to be conducted by him. The consent statement of the accused Ex.PE was also got recorded by him. On the direction of the DSP, accused led the police party to the disclosed place and got recovered three bags containing poppy husk, lying under the cot kept concealed under a loi of black colour. Accused, however, could not produce any permit or licence for possession of the poppy husk. Two samples of250 gms. each were taken out from the bags and the residue came to be 29 kg. 500 gm. Each bag. '

3. After preparation of the parcels of the samples and the residue case property, same were sealed with a seal of SI Hans Raj and SSA of DSP Satvir Singh Atwal. Case property was taken in possession vide recovery memo Ex.PG. Site plan of the place of recovery Ex.PG/1 was prepared. Accused was apprised about the grounds of his arrest vide memo Ex.PH. A special report Ex.PK, regarding arrest of accused in this case was also prepared.

4. After completing the proceedings of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was produced before the Court. After framing of the charge by the trial Court vide order dated 23.05.2002, trial was proceeded.

5. To pro