IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

230 Date of decision: 28.04.2026 BRIJ NANDAN @ MALI ......Appellant VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB .......Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ *****

Present: - None for the appellant.

Dr. (Ms.) Savi Nagpal, Asst. A.G. Punjab.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.06.2011 passed in NDPS File No. 177 dated 29.11.2006 arising out of FIR No. 83 dated 21.07.2006 registered under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 at Police Station Maur where the appellant had been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month in default of payment of fine.

2. There is no representation on behalf of the appellant. The position was the same on the last date of hearing as well. The Registry was directed to inform the Counsel for the appellant about the hearing. It has been reported by the office that intimation in this regard was sent to the Counsel for the appellant; however, no one has chosen to appear on behalf of the appellant. The appeal pertains to the year 2011. Further wait is not justified. The appeal is thus being decided on merits without waiting for the presence of the Counsel.

3. Briefly summarized, the facts of the present case are that on 21.07.2006, ASI Harjit Singh, along with HC Baldev Singh and other police officials, was proceeding in a Govt. vehicle from village Maur Charat Singh to Mari, in connection with patrolling. Independent witness Kaur Singh son of Mansa Singh, resident of Maur Kalan, was joined in the police party at the bus stand of the village Maur. Thereafter, when the police party reached 1.5 KM ahead of village Maur Charat Singh towards village Mari, the accused was spotted coming from the side of village Mari. He was carrying a plastic bag on his head, and on seeing the police party, he tried to run towards the fields after throwing the bag. On suspicion, the accused was apprehended by ASI Harjit Singh with assistance from other police officials. Due to the bag's fall, some poppy husk scattered on the ground, and it was repacked in the same bag. After making arrangements for weighing material, one sample of 100 grams was separated from the recovered poppy husk and the residue on weighing came to be 9 Kgs. 900 Grams. Sample parcel as well as bulk case property were sealed by the investigating officer ASI Harjit Singh, with his seal impression HS. Sample seal Ex.P1 was separately prepared, and the seal after use was handed over to independent witness Kaur Singh. Case property, i.e. sample parcel and bulk parcel, was taken into police possession vide memo Ex.PA, which was attested by the witnesses.

Ruqa was sent for registration of the case, based on which the FIR was registered against the accused. Personal search of the accused was conducted for the purpose of jamatalashi. The site plan of place of recovery was prepared. The accused was arrested after being informed of the grounds of arrest, and statements of witnesses were recorded.

4. Charge was later framed for commission of offence under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, 1985, to which the appellant-accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution was thereafter called to lead evidence.

5. The prosecution examined as many as 04 prosecution witnesses and thereafter closed its evidence. The entire incriminating evidence was put to the appellant-accused under Section 313 Cr. P.C., to which he denied the prosecution version and alleged false implication. It was submitted by him that the Police had arrested him from his house on 20.07.2006, and nothing was recovered from his possession. Being an outsider, a false case had been planted against him for getting a promotion. No evidence was, however, led by him to establish his defence.

6. After hearin