JUDGMENT :

CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J.

1. In this appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Cr.P.C.), the sole accused in Sessions Case No.38A/2012 on the file of the ASJ, Special Judge NDPS, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, challenges the judgement dated 27.02.2016 and order on sentence dated 10.03.2016, as per which he has been convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (the NDPS Act).

2. The prosecution case is that on 18.05.2012 at about 01.30 PM, the accused was found in possession of 1 kilogram of heroin while he was coming into Delhi crossing the Singhu Border in car bearing registration no. DL-4C AH 1455.

3. On appearance of the accused before the trial court, copies of all the prosecution documents were supplied to him in compliance with Section 207 Cr.P.C. On 21.12.2012, Charge under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act was framed against the accused, which was read over and explained to the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty.

4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined PWs. 1 to 15 and marked Exts. PQ1/A-F, PW2/A- I, PW4/A-F, PW4/D1-D4, PW5/A, PW6/A, PW7/A, PW8/A, PW9/A-H, PW10/A, PW12/A-E, PW14/A-K, Mark A, Mark B, P2, P4-2, P9, P12 and P11.

5. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Section 313(1)(b) Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence. The accused submitted that he had been falsely implicated. No contraband had been recovered from him or at his instance. The vehicle bearing registration no. DL 4CAH 1455 does not belong to him and the car was never in his possession. On 18.05.2012, he was taken away by some persons in plain clothes from near his house to an office. After reaching the office, he came to know that they were officials of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). He was illegally detained in their office, and was questioned about the vehicle in question. The officials told him that some contraband had been recovered from the said vehicle. He denied any connection with the said vehicle and stated that the vehicle was never in his possession and that he had never purchased it. He was beaten and threatened, and during prolonged custody, his family history was obtained. Thereafter, he was made to write a statement, which was dictated to him. No sealing or seizure proceedings were carried out in his presence. His signatures were obtained on various blank papers, small blank slips, semi-written papers, and written papers. He was also forced to write certain endorsements on some documents without reading their contents. All the documents, reports, and records had been fabricated and manipulated by the officials of the DRI. The panch witness is a stock witness of the DRI. He had retracted his earlier statement to the DRI. He had handed over his application for retraction in the Legal Cell of the Central Jail to be forwarded to the Court about two to three days after his arrest.

6. The accused offered himself as a witness and hence was examined as DW1. Ext.DW1/A and Mark X were marked.

7. The trial court, after hearing both sides and on a consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, vide judgment dated 27.02.2016 convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 21(c) of the NDPC Act and vide order on sentence dated 10.03.2016 sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of ₹1,00,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Aggrieved, the accused has preferred this appeal.

8. After the arguments of both sides were heard on 21.04.2026, the appeal was reserved for judgment. On going through the materials on record, it was found that proceedings were initiated by the trial court on the basis of a complaint filed by PW2, Intelligence Officer (IO), DRI, Headquarters (HQ), New Delhi.