IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SURESHWAR THAKUR, LALIT BATRA, JJ.
Kuldeep Singh alias Keepa - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
CRA-D. No. 276 of 2022
Decided On : 06-05-2024
Narcotics - NDPS Act - Sections 15, 52-A - The court emphasized the necessity of producing examined sample parcels as primary evidence to sustain charges under the NDPS Act, highlighting the importance of laboratory testing and proper inventory certification.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 15 of the NDPS Act for possession of poppy husk. The police intercepted the accused based on a tip-off and recovered poppy husk from his vehicle and a subsequent location. The trial court convicted him based on the evidence presented.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to produce the examined sample parcels in court, which were necessary to substantiate the charge. The certified inventory was deemed insufficient without the laboratory testing of the samples.
Issues: Whether the destruction of examined sample parcels was lawful and if the certified inventory could serve as primary evidence without the actual samples being produced in court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the production of examined sample parcels is essential to prove charges under the NDPS Act, and the absence of such evidence undermines the prosecution's case.
Result: The appeal is allowed, the conviction is quashed, and the appellant is acquitted.
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.
The instant appeal is directed against the verdict made on 2.3.2022, upon Sessions Case No. NDPS/1112/2014, by the learned Judge, Special Court, Jalandhar, where through he convicted the appellant for a charge drawn qua an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Through a sentencing order of even date, he proceeded to impose upon the convict sentence of rigorous imprisonment extending upto a period of 12 years, besides imposed sentence of fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, and, in default of payment of fine amount, he sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment extending upto a period of three months.
2. The accused-appellant became aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, and, also the consequent therewith sentence(s) (supra), as became upon the appellant. Resultantly, the aggrieved instituted thereagainst instant appeal before this Court.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
3. The genesis of the prosecution case are that, on 15.05.2014, SI Shiv Kumar along with police officials was present at ‘Y’ point (located on Dera Bille, River Road) in the area of village Sholey, where a secret information was received to the effect that accused Kuldeep Singh @ Keepa son of Joginder Singh, resident of village Madhepur, P.S. Jagraon is engaged in the business of poppy husk and today, he is coming in a maruti car bearing No.PB03-D-0728 loaded with poppy husk bags in order to sell the same from village Sholey towards river side of village Bille and if he is intercepted, he can be apprehended, red handed. Relying upon the said information, a ruqa was sent to the police station for recording FIR. In the mean time, a maruti car being driven by accused Kuldeep Singh @ Keepa bearing registration No.PB03-D-0728 was intercepted. Accused was enquired about his whereabouts.
4. Before effecting the search of accused, SI Shiv Kumar tried to take consent of accused, but accused Kuldeep Singh @ Keepa told that he intend to have his search from a Gazetted Officer. A separate non consent memo was prepared. Ashwani Kumar, DSP(D), Jalandhar Rural was called at the spot, who informed the accused that he has got suspicion regarding some narcotic substance in his possession. So, he has got a legal right to have his search and search of his car either before any other Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, but accused reposed confidence in Ashwani Kumar, DSP (D). A separate consent memo was prepared.
5. From the search of Dickey of car, two bags of poppy husk under the tarpaulin containing 20 kg each were recovered. Two sample of 250 grams each were separated from the bags of poppy husk and the remaining poppy husk came to 20 kg and 19½ kg each. Poppy husk was put back into bags and were sealed with seals bearing impressions ‘SK’ and ‘AK’. Sample parcels as well as bags of poppy husk were taken into possession vide separate recovery memos. Form M-29 was filled at the spot. Seal was handed over to ASI Surinder Singh after its use. On return to the police station, case property was produced before SI/SHO Surjit Singh. Maruti car along with tarpaulin was also taken in possession vide separate recovery memo.
6. During the course of interrogation, accused Kuldeep Singh @ Keepa suffered a disclosure statement to the effect that he has concealed 30 bags of poppy husk in the bushes, below the cheff (Parali) on the banks of river Sutlej in the area of Dhussi Bandh and accordingly, he got recovered 30 bags of poppy husk from the nominated place. Two sample of 250 grams each were separated from the bags and were converted into parcels. 29 bags came to 20 kg each and one bag of 19.500 grams on weighing the same, which were put back into said bags. Sample parcels as well as 30 bags of poppy husk were taken in possession vide separate recovery memo after sealing the same with seals bearing impression ‘SK’ and ‘AK’. The seal was handed over to ASI Surinder Singh
The court established that the production of examined sample parcels is crucial for proving charges under the NDPS Act, and certified inventories alone are insufficient without laboratory testing.
The necessity of laboratory testing of seized substances and the production of examined sample cloth parcels and the FSL report as primary evidence to sustain a charge under the NDPS Act.
The prosecution must maintain an unbroken chain of custody for evidence; failure to do so can result in acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
The necessity of complying with statutory requirements for personal search, preservation of case property, and the production of untampered case property in court as primary evidence to prove the cha....
The non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act, concerning inventory and sampling procedures, renders the prosecution's case invalid.
The court emphasized the necessity of obtaining a search warrant under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, reinforcing the importance of statutory compliance in criminal proceedings.
The prosecution's failure to produce primary evidence of seized contraband under the NDPS Act vitiated the trial, leading to the reversal of the conviction.
Strict compliance with the statutory provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly in cases involving the seizure and disposal of contraband, is crucial to establish the integrity of the evidence and the ....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of compliance with statutory provisions, the veracity of evidence, and the benefit of doubt in criminal cases.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.