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

2010 Supreme(UK) 565

2010 (2) N.C.C. 877
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harjit Singh Bedi and Mr. Justice C.K. Prasad
DEHAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1215 of 2005
Criminal Appeal No. 1216 of 2005
Decided on : 31.08.2010

Appearing Parties :Mr. P.S. Mishra, Mr. Nagendra Rai, Sr. Advs., Mr. J.S. Bhasin, Mr. D.K. Pandey, Mr. Upendra Mishra, Mr. T. Mahipal, Mr. Shantanu Sagar, Mr. Smarhar Singh, Mr. J.S. Bhasin, Mr. S. Chandra Shekhar, Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, Advocates

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Sec. 50 — Provisions — Compliance of — Requirement — Where the contraband Charas was recovered from vehicle on search — And no search of accused was conducted — Provisions of sec. 50 therefore not required to be complied with. (Paras 15 to 19)

       (B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Sec. 313 — Since accused cannot be cross-examined with respect to his examination under Sec. 313, Cr.P.C. his statement there under cannot be treated as evidence.

        (Paras 20, 21)

       (C) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Secs. 315, 313 and N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 — Plea of accused under — Accused, required to substantiate such plea by adducing some witness to prove the same — In case he does not chose to do so, in support of his plea or none was available, accused was free to examine himself in terms of Sec. 315 Criminal Code — Under which an accused is a competent witness of defence and may give evidence on oath in disproof of the charges levelled against him. (Para 21)

       (D) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Secs. 20, 35, 54 — "Conscious possession" — Presumption of — To bring an offence within the mischief of Sec. 20 of the Act 1985 possession has to be conscious possession — Sec. 35 of the Act recognizes that once possession is established the Court can presume that accused had a culpable mental state meaning thereby a conscious possession — Person who claims that he was not in conscious possession has to establish it — Presumption of conscious possession is further available u/S 54 of the Act — Sec. 54 provides that accused may be presumed to have committed the offence unless he accounts for satisfactorily the possession of the contraband. (Para 22)

       ¼v½ Lokid vkS"kf/k ,oa euksRrstd inkFkZ vf/kfu;e] 1985] /kkjk 50 ds izkfo/kkuksa ds ifjikyu dh vis{kk & tgka ij ryk'kh ds i'pkr okgu ls pjl cjken dh xbZ Fkh vkSj vfHk;qDr dh tkek ryk'kh ugha yh xbZ Fkh rks /kkjk 50 ds izkfo/kku dk ifjikyu fd;s tkus dh vko';drk ugha FkhA ¼izLrj 15 ls 19½

       ¼c½ n.M izfd;k lafgrk] 1973] /kkjk 313 & ih MCY;w fd /kkjk 313 ds c;kuksa ds lEcU/k esa vfHk;qDr dh vf/kijh{kk ugha dh tk ldrh rks mlds c;ku dks lk{; ds :i esa ugha iz;qDr fd;k tk ldrkA ¼izLrj 20] 21½

       ¼l½ n.M izfd;k lafgrk] 1973] /kkjk 315] 313 vkSj NDPS Act 1985 & ds vUrxZr vfHk;qDr dk rdZ & vfHk;qDr }kjk ,sls rdZ dks fl) djus ds okLrs fdlh lk{kh dks is'k fd;k tkuk visf{kr gS & ml n'kk esa tc og ,slk u djuk pkgs vkSj dksbZ miyCèk Hkh uk gks rks vfHk;qDr /kkjk 315 lhvkj ih lh ds rgr viuk c;ku ntZ djkus ds fy, Lora= gS ftlds vUrxZr vfHk;qDr cpko i{k dk ,d l{ke lk{kh gksrk gS vkSj mlds fo#) yxk;s x;s vkjksi dks >wBk fl) djus gsrq l'kiFk lk{; ns ldrk gSA

        ¼izLrj 21½

       ¼n½ Lokid vkS"kf/k ,oa euksRrstd inkFkZ vf/kfu;e] 1985] /kkjk 20] 35] 54 & ^lpsr dCts* dh vo/kkj.kk & /kkjk 20 NDPS Act ds vUrxZr fdlh vijk/k dks djus ds fy, lpsr dCtk gksuk pkfg, & /kkjk 35 ds vUrxZr tc ,d ckj dCtk fl) gks tkrk gS rks U;k;ky; ;g vo/kkj.kk cuk ldrk gS fd vfHk;qDr dh ekufld fLFkfr ,slh Fkh ftl ds vk/kkj ij lpsr dCtk ekuk tk ldrk gS & tks O;fDr ;g dgrk gS fd mldk lpsr dCtk ugha Fkk rks mls ;g fl) djuk gksrk gS & /kkjk 54 NDPS Act ds vUrxZr Hkh lpsr dCts dh vo/kkj.kk dh tk ldrh gS & /kkjk 54 esa ;g izkfo/kku gS fd tc rd vfHk;qDr fuf"k) inkFkZ ds dCts dk larks"ktud mRrj ugha nsrk gS rks mlds }kjk vijk/k dkfjr fd;s tkus dh vo/kkj.kk dh tk ldrh gSA ¼izLrj 22½

JUDGMENT

Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J. — Both the appeals arise out of the same judgment and as such they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The case unfolded by the prosecution and accepted by both the courts i.e. trial and appellate Court is that on 18th October, 2002 at 9.20 A.M. PW.16, Brijesh Sood, Station House Officer, Police Station Sundernagar along with PW.8, Madan Lal, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police and other Police personnel were present for a routine check at Lalit Chowk at Sundernagar in the District of Mandi. Brijesh Sood received a secret information that a car bearing Registration no. HP-34-7700 is coming from Mandi side in which two persons are carrying huge quantity of ‘Charas’. The aforesaid information was reduced into writing and intimation to the said effect was sent to the Additional Superintendent of Police, Mandi. At about 10 A.M., one Maruti Esteem Car bearing Registration No. HP-34-7700 came from Mandi side which was stopped by PW.16, Brijesh Sood and he found two persons sitting in the car, including the driver. Brijesh Sood made enquiry from the person who was driving the car and he disclosed his name as Dehal Singh (appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1215 of 2005) and the other person sitting on the front seat by the side of the driver-seat, disclosed his name as Dinesh Kumar, resident of Goa (appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1216 of 2005). Brijesh Sood gave option in writing to the accused persons, whether they want to give personal search or search of the vehicle before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. Both the appellants gave their consent for being searched by him. Accordingly PW.16, Brijesh Sood searched the car and luggage lying inside the car but nothing incriminating was found either in the car or the luggage. A mechanic was called by PW.3, Churamani, who opened the shields of the windows/doors when packets of brown colour were found concealed between the shields and doors wrapped with black and red adhesive tape. On opening the packets, ‘Charas’ in the shape of stick and chappatis was detected. Churamani was asked by PW.16, Brijesh Sood to bring weighing scale and weight. On brought the weighing scale from the grocery shop of PW.5, Ram Lal and on weightment 27 Kg. 800 gms. of Charas was found. Two samples of 50 grams each were taken out after mixing the entire charas. It was duly sealed.

3. Appellant, Dehal Singh produced the registration certificate along with driving licence and other papers concerning the vehicle. The appellant and seized Charas along with samples were taken to the Police Station where the personal search of the appellants was conducted. The samples of the Charas and other articles recovered from the personal search of the appellants were deposited with PW.8, Additional Malkhana Head constable, Rajinder Kumar for safe custody. First Information Report was thereafter drawn and a special report sent to the Superintendent of Police. PW.8, Rajinder Kumar sent one parcel of the sample to the Chemical Examiner, who in his report opined that it contained Charas. After usual investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the two appellants and ultimately they were put on trial. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. The prosecution in support of its case has all together examined 16 witnesses besides various other documentary evidence were also brought on record. In their statements, under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure appellants pleaded false implication and both of them have stated that the appellant, Dinesh Kumar had taken lift in the car from Kullu to Delhi.

5. On appreciation of the evidence the trial court held both the appellants guilty under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonmen

















































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