PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Sudhir Singh and Sukhvinder Kaur, JJ.
State Of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Gurdit Singh @ Vishal And Another – Respondent
CRM-A-731-2024 (O&M)
Decided on : 28-03-2025
(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 22(a), 29, and 52-A - Acquittal of accused - Prosecution failed to prove possession of contraband beyond reasonable doubt due to non-examination of key witness and lack of independent corroboration - The trial court noted a consistent pattern in similar cases, raising doubts about the prosecution's narrative. (Paras 8, 16, 20, 21)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378(3) - Leave to appeal against acquittal - Appellate court's interference is limited to cases of perversity or illegality in the trial court's judgment. (Paras 12, 24)
Facts of the case:
The State sought leave to appeal against the acquittal of two accused charged under the NDPS Act for possession of 1500 tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride. The trial court acquitted them due to insufficient evidence, particularly the non-examination of a material witness. (Paras 1, 7)
Findings of Court:
The trial court found that the prosecution's case was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly due to the absence of key witness testimony and the lack of independent corroboration. (Paras 21, 24)
Issues: The main issues included whether the trial court's acquittal was justified and whether the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the accused. (Paras 11, 12)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and the absence of key witness testimony significantly undermined the prosecution's credibility. (Paras 12, 21)
Result: Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Sukhvinder Kaur, J. - Applicant - State of Punjab has preferred the instant application under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C. seeking leave to appeal against judgment dated 25.09.2023 passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Faridkot vide which the respondents have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 22(a)/29 of the NDPS Act.
2. Factual scenario, as unfolded by prosecution is that on 07.11.2020, Inspector Sanjeev Kumar, Incharge Narcotic Cell, Faridkot received information from HC Beant Singh regarding apprehending of a person on Hari Nau-Matta link road under suspicious circumstances, who was found carrying a polythene bag hanging on the handle of his motorcycle. On seeing the police party, he became perplexed and tried to turn back but his motorcycle did not start. Since HC Beant Singh was not competent to investigate the matter falling under NDPS Act, so he had called Inspector Sanjeev Kumar to take further necessary steps in this respect. Inspector Sanjeev Kumar accompanied by Bhupinder Singh and other police officials reached at the location at about 1:45 P.M. Inspector Sanjeev Kumar tried to join some independent witness but none was available. After giving his introduction to the accused, he inquired about his name and other particulars. He was also apprised regarding his right and was given the option to have his search conducted before a Gazetted officer or a Magistrate. Notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was served. Accused opted for getting his search conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer. As such, DSP, Sub Division, Kotkapura was called through PCR, Faridkot, who arrived at the spot at about 4:30 p.m. DSP Balkar Singh also made efforts to join some independent witness from the public, but nobody was ready for the same. DSP Balkar Singh disclosed his identity to the accused and ascertained his name and particulars and expressed his suspicion regarding carrying some intoxicated material by the accused, in the polyethylene bag hanging with the handle of his motorcycle. DSP Balkar Singh further apprised the accused about his right to get his search conducted through a Magistrate or any Gazetted Officer, but accused reposed faith in DSP Balkar Singh. Thereafter, Inspector Sanjeev Kumar under supervision and instructions of DSP Balkar Singh conducted search of polythene bag being carried by the accused which led to recovery of three boxes of NRx Tramadol Hydrochloride Tablets labelled as Clovil-100 SR, each box containing 50 strips and each strip having 10 tablets, thus, total 1500 tablets. These tablets had a consistent batch number, manufacture date (10/2020) and expiry date (09/2022). Seized items were converted into a sealed bulk parcel duly sealed with seal impressions of Inspector Sanjeev Kumar 'SK' and DSP Balkar Singh 'BS' respectively. Specimen sealed chit was also prepared. DSP Balkar Singh retained his seal with him. Apart from the tablets, registration certificate of said motorcycle in name of one Charanjit Kaur along with pollution and insurance certificate were also recovered by Inspector Sanjeev Kumar. Sealed bulk parcel and seized motorcycle were taken into police possession vide memo Ex.P3.
As accused Gurdit Singh @ Vishal could not produce any valid permit, license or bill for having in his possession the aforesaid intoxicant tablets, so ruqa was sent to police station through Constable Varinder Singh and formal FIR was registered by SI Surinder Singh. Rough site plan of place of recovery was prepared. Accused Gurdit Singh @ Vishal was formally arrested.
During the spot inspection, accused suffered a disclosure statement that the recovered tablets were supplied to him by accused Satyam Kumar, so Satyam Kumar was nominated as an accused for offence punishable under Section 29 of the NDPS Act.
After spot inspection, police party returned to the police station. Accused along with sealed bulk parcel and recovered contraband was presented before SI Surinder Singh, officiating SHO, who af
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and the absence of key witness testimony undermines the credibility of the prosecution's narrative.
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless compelling reasons exist to overturn an acquittal.
The prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt; discrepancies and lack of independent witnesses can lead to acquittal.
Prosecution must establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, especially in narcotics cases, where procedural integrity is critical for securing a conviction.
Acquittal of the accused under the NDPS Act is upheld as the trial court's judgment was not flawed and adhered to evidentiary standards.
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.