SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 8679

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DALLU SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent



259 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 10.02.2025 DALLU SINGH ...Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. P.S. Sekhon, Advocate and Mr. L.S. Sekhon, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ramesh Kumar Ambavta, AAG Haryana.

***

Harpreet Singh Brar, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has approached this Court impuging the order dated 12.11.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar vide which the application for releasing the truck on superdari to the petitioner has been dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 25.10.2024, when the police party was on patrolling duty, a secret information was received that one truck bearing registration Nо. PB-11-AY-9081 in which two persons are coming from Indore (Madhya Pradesh), and are going to Ludhiana. There is intoxicant substance (poppy husk) in the said truck and if barricading be conducted then the intoxicating substance (poppy husk) can be recovered. Finding the informa- tion to be credible, the notice under Section 42 of the ND&PS Act 1985 was prepared and barricading was formed. Thereafter, as per the information given by the secret informer, one truck was seen coming from the side of Hansi, which was signalled to stop by the complainant. The driver of the said truck after seeing the police party stopped the truck near the barricading. When the driver of the truck was asked about his name and address then he told his name as Major Singh resident of Gardayani, District Sangrur and the person sitting on the left side of the driver's seat told his name as Ajaib Singh resident of village Tibbi Basti, Lehra Gaga, District Sangrur. There was suspicion that there was intoxicating substance (Poppy Husk) in the truck. Thereafter, on issuance of notice under Section 50 of NDPS Act, search of the offending vehicle was conducted and two plastic bags of white colour and 04 plastic bags of black colour were recovered from which intoxicating substance i.e. poppy husk was recovered. All the plastic bags containing intoxicating substance (poppy husk) were found to be of 50 kg 283 grams of weight including weight of the plastic bags. Recovered 06 parcels of plastic bags and truck bearing registration No. PB-11-AY-9081 was taken into possession by the police vide memo. Accused persons were arrested and FIR(supra) was lodged.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the afore- said vehicle i.e truck make Tata LPT 3118 bearing rergistration No. PB-11-AY- 9081 is the only source of livelihood of the family of the petitioner but the same has been taken into custody by the investigating agency on 25.10.2024. Learned counsel further contends that there is no proper parking space available inside the police station and due to the severe weather conditions, the condition of the vehicle is deteriorating day by day. The vehicle is more than Rs. 30 lacs of value but the same will turn into scrap due to improper parking space at the police sta- tion. Learned counsel further contends that son of the petitioner is registered owner of the vehicle in question as discernible from the Registration Certificate (Annexure P-2) and he has executed a special power of attorney (Annexure P-3) in favour of the petitioner in relation to the aforesaid vehicle and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar has passed the impugned order without judicially adverting to the factual matrix contained in NDPS Act as well as the provisions contained in Cr.P.C. in this regard and the accused, who have been arrested at the spot along with the contraband have misused the vehicle owned by the petitioner who had no knowledge that his vehicle would be used for such illegal activities.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by the petitioner on the ground that the vehicle in question has been used by the petitioner for transporting poppy straw and as such, the same being the case prop

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top