The court upheld the acquittal of the respondent under the NDPS Act due to significant inconsistencies in testimonies and doubts regarding the credibility of evidence presented by the prosecution.

H.S. Grewal, J.

Today no one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent. In the interest of justice, this Court deems it appropriate that the respondent should not be left unrepresented before this Court. Hence, Ms. Nidhi, Advocate is appointed as amicus curiae to represent the respondent in the present case.

2.The present appeal has been preferred by the State against the judgment dated 11.11.2004 passed by the learned Special Judge, Mansa in case FIR No.57 dated 22.05.2003, registered under Sections 15 , 25, and 60 of the NDPS Act at Police Station, Jhunir District Mansa whereby the respondent had been acquitted of the charges by giving him the benefit of doubt.

3.The case of the prosecution is that on 22.05.2003, ASI Harpal Singh along with police party comprising HC Ganga Ram, HC Tej Ram, HC Mela Singh, Constable Ram Singh and Constable Joginder Singh were on patrol duty. When they reached on the link road leading to village Makhewala on G.T. road Mansa-Sirsa 'T' point then one-Baljinder Singh s/o Hamir Singh, who was driving a scooter, had stopped there and the police party was talking with him. In the meanwhile, one Jeep bearing no. HR-10B-9867 came from the side of village Fatta Maluka. ASI Harpal Singh signaled him to stop but he had tried to take a U-turn. ASI Harpal Singh with the help of other police officials apprehended him and checked the back side of the jeep where four bags were found lying. ASI Harpal Singh asked the name of that person who disclosed his name as Leela Singh son of Bachan Singh (respondent). ASI Harpal Singh told him that they had suspicion of intoxicant substance lying in the four bags and he wanted to conduct a search of these bags but had a right to get his search conducted before a Magistrate or any Gazetted Officer. Thereafter, the respondent opted his search at the spot in presence of a Gazetted Officer. Therefore, a consent memo was prepared which was thumb marked by the respondent and attested by the witnesses.

4.On 22.05.2003 at about 11:30 AM, DSP (D) Teja Singh, who was informed through wireless message, had reached there in his Gypsy along with his gunman. DSP Teja Singh told the respondent that he was Gazetted Officer of the Punjab Government and he was posted as DSP(D), Mansa. He wanted to conduct a search of the bags lying in the jeep as he was suspecting some intoxicant substance in the bags. However, the respondent showed confidence in DSP Teja Singh and stated that he wanted the search of the bags at the spot in presence of the DSP. On the directions of DSP, rank information-cum-consent memo was prepared which was thumb marked by the respondent and attested by the witnesses. On further directions of the DSP, ASI Harpal Singh conducted a search of the bags after unloading the same from the jeep. The bags contained poppy straw. Two samples of 100 grams each were taken out from each bag. Remaining poppy straw after weighment in each of the bag came to be 30 kgs. The samples and the bulks were made into parcels separately and sealed with the seal bearing impression of letters ‘HS’. Sample of the seal was prepared separately. Seal after use was handed over to PW Baljinder Singh. On search of the jeep, driving licence of the respondent was recovered. The case property along with the jeep and driving licence were taken into possession of the police vide recovery memo prepared at the spot which was attested by the witnesses. The respondent was arrested and was taken to the Police Station. Upon his personal search, an amount of Rs.120/- was r