IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SANJAY VASHISTH, J.
Kali - Appellant
Versus
State of U.T. Chandigarh – Respondent
CRA-S No.2384-SB of 2003 (O&M)
Decided On : 20-01-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of drug conviction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments on non-compliance of ndps provisions. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. state's evidence and prosecution arguments. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. court's evaluation of evidence compliance. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. failure to comply with mandatory ndps provisions. (Para 12) |
| 6. judgment set aside and appellant acquitted. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT :
(Sanjay Vashisth, J.)
Present appeal is filed by appellants-Smt.Kali, against the judgment of her conviction dated 06.11.2003 and order of sentence dated 07.11.2003, passed by Ld. Judge, Special Court, Chandigarh, in NDPS Case No.74 of 07.08.2003/26.09.2000, arising from FIR No.285 dated 23.07.2000, under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity 'NDPS Act'), registered at Police Station Sector 39, Chandigarh.
2. For the recovery of 12 grams smack, appellant, was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 01 year and six months, and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 06 months.
FACTS LEADING TO REGISTRATION OF THE FIR:
3. On 23.07.2000 at about 3.00 P.M., police party headed by SI Kuldeep Singh including SI Jai Singh and other police officials was present at police booth Dadu Majra Colony, Chandigarh. After some time, a secret information was received that Gujri and Kali residents of House No.2676, Dadu Majra Colony, UT, Chandigarh deals in smack in their house and in case their house was raided, at this time, smack can be recovered.
After sending information to the police station, one public person Jaspal Singh, who was joined by the police team reached the house No.2676, Dadu Majra Colony, Chandigarh. By sending a wireless message, Shri B.D.Bector, DSP was also called on spot at about 4.30 P.M. and he joined the raiding party. On knocking the doors of the house, Gujri opened the same and purpose of visiting of police party in their house was disclosed by DSP B.D.Bector by projecting his identity.
First of all, search of Gujri was conducted and in connection with the recovery from her possession, a separate case was registered against her under NDPS Act. Thereafter, DSP B.D.Bector served a notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act upon appellant-Kali, who opted to be searched in the presence of DSP B.D.Bector.
Accordingly, as per instructions of DSP B.D.Bector, a lady constable-Devinder Kaur conducted the search of the accused and on search, 12 grams smack wrapped in a glazed paper was recovered. Two grams smack was separated for sampling. Both the sample parcels and parcel containing remaining case property were sealed with the seal 'KS' and were taken in police possession. Sample of the seal was also obtained on a piece of cloth. The seal after its use was handed over to Jaspal Singh. Ruqa was sent to the police station on the basis of which FIR was lodged.
By calling ASI Gajjan Singh on spot from the police station, further investigation was conducted by him.
4. After recording of the statement of witnesses and the completion of the investigation, final report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. was submitted. Accordingly, appellant was charge-sheeted for the offence under Section 21 of the NDPS Act to which she pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. Prosecution examined total 12 witnesses and ultimately, appellant was convicted and sentenced as has already been detailed in the initial part of this judgment.
6. Mr.Abhaysher Singh, Advocate, who was appointed as Legal Aid Counsel by this Court vide order dated 15.12.2022 opened his argument with the point that in view of non-compliance of the provisions of NDPS Act, conviction of the appellant cannot sustain.
Notice is available on record as Ex.PC. Translated version of which is reproduced here below:
“Notice Ex.PC
My name is Bhagwan Dass Bector. In Chandigarh Police, Chandigarh Administration, I am G. O. (DSP) (Gazzetted Officer). I have information that in your possession namely Kali w/o Suka Singh R/o House
Ajay Malik and others v. State of UT Chandigarh, 2009(3) RCR(Cri) 649
Possession of narcotic substances can result in conviction under NDPS despite procedural non-compliance if evidentiary strength supports prosecution's claims.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of strict compliance with the procedural provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Section 52A(2), (3) and (4), for seizure and s....
Mandatory compliance with NDPS Act's provisions for seizure and evidence is essential; failure leads to invalidation of convictions.
The court established that violations of mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act, particularly Sections 50 and 52A, can invalidate criminal proceedings against accused individuals.
Point of Law : Harsher the punishment, more is the strictness of proof required for the prosecution. The burden is always upon prosecution to prove the case against the person accused with proof beyo....
Recovery of Ganja – Samples drawn in presence of Magistrate and list thereof on being certified alone would constitute primary evidence for the purposes of trial.
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.