IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sureshwar Thakur, Sudeepti Sharma, JJ.
Jagjit Singh @ Kala – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
CRA-D No. 862-DB of 2005
Decided On : 09-09-2024
Narcotics - Conviction - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Sections 15, 42, 50, 57, 293, 294 - The court found that the search conducted without a warrant violated statutory provisions, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was convicted for possessing contraband under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act after police recovered poppy husk from his truck. The search was conducted based on secret information without obtaining a search warrant.
Finding of the Court:
The court determined that the search violated Section 42 of the Act, as no search warrant was obtained, and the prosecution failed to establish a cogent case against the accused.
Issues: Whether the search conducted without a warrant violated the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, affecting the validity of the evidence against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the failure to comply with mandatory provisions of the Act regarding search warrants rendered the evidence inadmissible, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Result: The appeal is allowed, and the accused is acquitted of all charges.
JUDGMENT :
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
1. The instant appeal is directed against the verdict made on 19.08.2005, upon Sessions Case No. 32 of 2004, by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirsa, where-through he convicted the accused for a charge drawn qua an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Moreover, through a separate sentencing order of 22.08.2005, he proceeded to impose upon the convict sentence of rigorous imprisonment extending upto a period of 15 years, besides imposed upon him, sentence of fine of Rs.1,00,000/- besides in default of payment of fine amount, he sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment extending upto a period of five years.
2. The accused-convict became aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, and, also the consequent therewith sentences (supra), as became imposed. Resultantly, he instituted there-against the instant appeal bearing No. CRA-D-862-DB-2005.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
3. The genesis of the prosecution case are that, on 16.10.2003, ASI Jagdish Rai while posted as such at CIA staff, Sirsa, was present near Old Truck Union, Sirsa, in connection with patrolling and crime detection along with ASI Jai Pal Singh, EHC Karambir Singh, EHC Rajinder Singh and other police officials. The police party was in a police jeep. ASI Jagdish Rai received a secret information to the effect that a truck with fictitious No. HR-31-4157 whereas its real registration number was RJ-31G-1558 was loaded with Choora post bags and had gone towards Dabwali from Sirsa and that the owner of the said truck was accused Jagjit Singh @ Kala son of Harjinder Singh and that the accused was himself driving the said truck. On this secret information ASI Jagdish Rai sent a written intimation Ex.PE to the Deputy Superintendent of Police (HQ) Sirsa, as required under Section 41 of the NDPS Act and thereafter he formed Dabwali a raiding party and proceeded towards Dabwali to apprehend the said truck. When the police party crossed village Panjuana and reached near a T-Point Bhangu they noticed the truck and as such the truck in question was apprehended and got stopped on the T-Point of village Bhangu. A fictitious registration number plate bearing registration No. HR-31-4157 was found affixed on the truck on the front as well as back side. The accused Jagjit Singh @ Kala was driving the said truck and hence he was apprehended. ASI Jagdish Rai then served a written notice under Section 50 the NDPS Act, Ex.PH to the accused informing him he had a suspicion that there was some contraband substance in the truck and, therefore the same was to be searched and that he had a right to get the truck searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or Magistrate if he so desired. The accused vide his reply Ex.PH/1 desired that the search of the truck be conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer. The notice Ex.PH and the reply Ex.PH/1 were signed by the accused and attested by ASI Jaipal Singh and EHC Karambir Singh. ASI Jagdish Rai then summoned Shri Rai Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sirsa, for conducting the search of the truck in his presence. He also summoned a photographer from Sirsa. Shri Rai Singh, Deputy Supdt. of Police then reached the place of recovery within few minutes and a photographer also reached there from Police Station Sadar Sirsa. The search of the truck was then commenced in the presence of Shri Rai Singh, DSP. The photographer had also taken the photographs before and after conducting the search. On search of the truck, the same was found with 170 bags containing poppy husk. Two samples of choora post, each weighing 100 gms., were separated from each bag and the remaining choora post in each bag was found to be 39 Kgs., 800 gms. All the samples and the gunny bags with the remaining choora post were separately sealed with the seals of JR as well as of RS and were taken into possession along with the and truck vide recover
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 must maintain an unbroken chain of custody for evidence; failure to do so can result in acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must establish a clear and unbroken chain of custody and evidence handling to prove the charges beyond a 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 judgment emphasizes the importance of compliance with statutory provisions, the veracity of evidence, and the benefit of doubt in criminal cases.
The High Court affirmed that, in chance recovery cases, compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act is not mandatory, reinforcing the credibility of police testimony despite the absence of independent....
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.