Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 126 (PNJ)

Ranjit Singh v. State Of Punjab

2005-01-24

PRITAM PAL

body2005
Judgment Pritam Pal, J. 1. Ranjit Singh alias Kaka alias Bhundi son of Nahar Singh, has filed the present appeal against the judgment and order dated July 13, 1990 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, whereby he was convicted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One lac). Further, in default of payment of fine, he was also ordered to undergo R.I. for one year. 2. In nut-shell, the facts giving rise to this appeal may be recapitulated thus :- On May 30, 1988, PW-4 Inspector/S.H.O. Hardip Singh, was posted at Police Station, Jagraon. On that date, he alongwith PW-3 S.I. Harbhajan Singh and other police officials, was present at Naka on the culvert of the canal minor. In the area of village Akhara. There, he had received a secret information that the appellant Ranjit Singh had collected heavy quantity of poppy husk in his fields and if a raid was conducted, poppy husk could be recovered from the fields of the appellant. Hardip Singh aforesaid, the then S.H.O. organised a raiding party. One Dharam Singh was also joined and then raided the fields of the appellant. There, the appellant was found concealing the bags of poppy husk under the heap of cotton plant sticks. He was then apprehended. His personal search was conducted, but nothing was recovered. A memo Ex. PC to that effect was also prepared. Thereafter, the appellant was given an option if he wanted to get the search of cotton plant sticks in the presence of the Gazetted Officer ?, but he reposed confidence in the aforesaid police officer namely Hardip Singh, Investigating Officer of this case. Thereupon a search was conducted of the cotton plant sticks, from where the got recovered 20 bags of poppy husk. On weighing, each bag was found to have contained 35 KG of poppy husk. From each bag, a sample of 250 grams was taken out and, thereafter, the samples as well as he remaining case property were sealed separately, 20 bags of poppy husk Ex. P-1 to Ex.P-20 were sealed with the seal bearing alphabet of HS. The seal after use was handed over to Dharam Singh. From each bag, a sample of 250 grams was taken out and, thereafter, the samples as well as he remaining case property were sealed separately, 20 bags of poppy husk Ex. P-1 to Ex.P-20 were sealed with the seal bearing alphabet of HS. The seal after use was handed over to Dharam Singh. Case property and the samples were then taken into possession by the police vide recovery memo Ex.PB. Then, ruqa Ex. PD was sent to the police station for registration of the case, on the basis of which, formal F.I.R. Ex.PD/1 was recorded by Head Constable Dhian Singh, PW-4 then prepared a rough site plan Ex. PE of the place of recovery. He also recorded the statements of the recovery witnesses and deposited the case property and sample with MHC Harsukhdev Pal. After completion of necessary investigation of this case, accused was challaned for commission of offence punishable under Section 15 of the Act, by Inspector Harbel Singh. 3 The appellant was charge-sheeted by the learned trial Court vide its order dated July 27, 1989, for the commission of offence under Section 15 of the Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In order to prove its case against the appellant, the prosecution examined as many as five witnesses and also tendered into evidence affidavit Ex. PH, report of Director, Forensic Science Laboratory. 5. After closure of the prosecution evidence, statement of the accused was recorded in terms of Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein he denied all the allegations of the prosecution and pleaded false implication in this case. He then also submitted as under :- "I had a dispute with my brother regarding partition of our ancestral land. The police came to our village and took me and my brother to the police station, Jagraon. Dharam Singh PW had also gone there. My brother told the police that I am relation of Kaka alias Sukhdev Singh of the village and so I was troubling him. Kaka Singh alias Sukhdev Singh Sarpanch had moved a writ petition as his men were detained illegally by the police. Warrant Officer alongwith Mohinder Singh came to Jagraon. There I met Mohinder Singh and Warrant Officer told them that Darshan Singh and Parminder Singh have been let off whereas Hansu is still in illegal detention. Kaka Singh alias Sukhdev Singh Sarpanch had moved a writ petition as his men were detained illegally by the police. Warrant Officer alongwith Mohinder Singh came to Jagraon. There I met Mohinder Singh and Warrant Officer told them that Darshan Singh and Parminder Singh have been let off whereas Hansu is still in illegal detention. I accompanied Mohinder Singh to C.I.A. Staff and got recovered Hansu from illegal detention. I also accompanied Warrant Officer to Police Station, Jagraon to deliver notice to Inspector Hardeep Singh, S.H.O. Due to this, the S.H.O. became annoyed with me and detained me in the police station and my brother was asked to go away". 6. In support of his plea, he also examined DW-1 Jai Pal Singh Patial, a retired superintendent of Punjab and Haryana High Court, DW-2 Sukhdev Singh and PW-3 Mohinder Singh. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the entire record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated in the opening part of this judgment. This is how the appellant has come up in appeal before this Court against the judgment and order aforesaid. 8. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.C. Bhardwaj, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, and with their assistance have gone through the record carefully. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant has put-forth two fold arguments. At the first place, he submitted, that in this case, the prosecution has not complied with the mandatory provisions of Section 42(2) of the Act, while framing the case against the appellant, inasmuch as, in the case in hand, a secret information is alleged to have been received by PW-4 Inspector Hardeep Singh, when he was present at the Naka in the area of village Akhara. According to the learned counsel, said Hardeep Singh was bound to reduce that secret information into writing and then send the same to his higher officer, but he has failed to do so. Thus, due to non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of Section 42 sub-clause (2) of the Act, the appellant is entitled to acquittal. In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied upon the case laws reported in the case of State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh, 1999(3) RCR(Crl.) 533 and Backodan Abdul Rahiman v. State of Kerala, 2002(2) RCR(Crl.) 385. 10. In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied upon the case laws reported in the case of State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh, 1999(3) RCR(Crl.) 533 and Backodan Abdul Rahiman v. State of Kerala, 2002(2) RCR(Crl.) 385. 10. On the second point, contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that link evidence is missing in this case inasmuch as the case property contained in 20 bags alleged to have been recovered from the appellant was not bearing mark of seal, when the same was produced before the learned trial Court. In this view of the matter, learned counsel contended that chain of link evidence is, thus, missing and on this score alone, the prosecution case must fail and the appellant is entitled to acquittal. 11. On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, has repelled the aforesaid points of arguments raised on behalf of the appellant. In rebuttal, he also placed reliance on the case law reported as Sajan Abraham v. State of Kerala, 2001(3) RCR(Crl.) 808 (SC) : (2001)6 SCC 692. 12. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions raised on behalf of the parties, perused the case law cited, and with their assistance, have gone through the record carefully. 13. So far as the first point of argument raised on behalf of the appellant is concerned, in the given facts and circumstances of this case, the same is found to be devoid of any merit, inasmuch as in the instant case, the police party headed by PW-4 Inspector Hardeep Singh was present in a remote area of village Akhara where he had received the secret information. From the evidence brought on the record, it is apparent that immediately after having received the secret information, the police party had rushed towards the fields of the appellant and they immediately raided the cotton-plant sticks, where he (the appellant) was found to have concealed the 20 bags of contraband substance. In such a situation, compliance with the requirement of sub-section (2) of Section 42 of the Act, would have delayed the trapping of the accused which might have led to his escape. 14. In such a situation, compliance with the requirement of sub-section (2) of Section 42 of the Act, would have delayed the trapping of the accused which might have led to his escape. 14. Faced with such a situation, the Apex Court in Sajan Abrahams case (supra) observed that when the officer concerned was on patrolling duty and had received the secret information that the accused was selling the contraband drugs at a particular place, thereupon, he immediately rushed to that place without observing the requirement of Section 42(2) of the Act, so that the accused could not escape, in such circumstances, it could not be said to be a case of violation of Section 42(2) of the Act. 15. Now adverting to the last point of argument raised on behalf of the appellant. In this case, 20 bags of poppy husk were exhibited as Ex. P-1 to P-20 before the trial Court when the same were produced on November 29.1.1989. No doubt, there was no chit or identification mark on the case property as stated by PW-3 Harbhajan Singh S.H.O. in the first line of his cross- examination before the learned trial Court, but at the same time, each bag containing the case property was found to have been marked with the Malkhana number in which the case property was kept. It is also stated by PW-3, who is a witness to the recovery that Mudh number was also recorded on each bag exhibited from Serial Nos. 1 to 20. Further, a perusal the affidavit Ex. PA and recovery memo Ex. PB duly proved in the case of the prosecution go a long way to complete the chain in link evidence against the appellant. On weighing, the case property was found to be 700 kilograms and as per the report Ex. PH of the Assistant Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh Punjab, sample of the said property was found to be that of "poppy husk" and this report has not been challenged on behalf of the appellant during the course of arguments. 16. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the considered view that the aforesaid points raised on behalf of the appellant and devoid of any merit. 17. As a sequal to my above discussion, this appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed. 16. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the considered view that the aforesaid points raised on behalf of the appellant and devoid of any merit. 17. As a sequal to my above discussion, this appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed. The appellant, who is on bail in this case, is directed to be taken into custody immediately to serve the remaining period of sentence awarded to him in this case.