Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 372 (PNJ)

Hardeep Singh v. State Of Punjab

2010-01-15

SABINA

body2010
Judgment SABINA, J. 1. The appellant was convicted for an offence under Sec.15 of the narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act- for short) vide judgment dated 17.5.2004 by the Judge, Special Court, Patiala. Vide order of the even date the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence, the present appeal. Prosecution case, as noticed by the trial Court in para Nos.1 to 4 of its judgment, is reproduced herein below:- "on 24.3.2001, Tarsem Lal ASI while posted as Incharge Police Post Ramnagar of Police Station Samana along with other police officials while on patrol duty on road leading from Bibipur to Chaba in the area of village Bibipur detailed the accused while driving on tractor No. PJN-5183 and another unidentified person travelling on the mudguard of the tractor succeeded in fleeing. On the lift of the tractor, there were five bags tied with a rope, suspecting that there was contraband in the bags, Tarsem Lal ASI told the accused that the search of the bags loaded on the lift of the tractor supra is to be conducted and if he so desires, some gazetted officer or Magistrate could be called. Accused vide statement Ex. PF opted the search of the bags in the presence of a gazetted officer by signing this statement which was thumb marked by Sadhu Singh, Public witness and signed by Jagdish Chand ASI and, thereupon, Shamsher Singh, DSP (D) was called at the spot who on arrival disclosed his identity to the accused and the latter vide memo Ex. PB opted to the search of his bags from Tarsem Lal asi in the presence of DSP. Thereafter, search of the bags loaded on the lift of the tractor resulted in recovery of poppy husk; two samples of 250 grams each were drawn from each bag and the remaining poppy husk of all the five bags each on weighment came to 32 1/2 kgs. All the 10 parcels and 5 bags containing remaining poppy husk were separately sealed by Tarsem lal ASI with his seal bearing impression TL and with the seal of Shamsher Singh dsp bearing impression SS which were also affixed on chit Ex. P1 and case property was seized vide memo Ex. All the 10 parcels and 5 bags containing remaining poppy husk were separately sealed by Tarsem lal ASI with his seal bearing impression TL and with the seal of Shamsher Singh dsp bearing impression SS which were also affixed on chit Ex. P1 and case property was seized vide memo Ex. PC which was thumb marked by Sashu Singh, public witness and signed by jagdish Chand ASI and Shamsher Singh DSP. Seal after use was handed over to Sadhu Singh, public witness while DSP retained his own seal. 2. Further investigation of Hardeep Singh accused revealed the identity of other person who fled away from the place of recovery as Suba Singh and the latter was identified by Parkasgh Masih HC. Later ruqa Ex. PG was sent to the Police Station through Palwinder Singh Constable which formed the basis of formal FIR Ex. PG/1. Later Tarsem Lal ASI who is the investigating officer of this case prepared site plan Ex. PH and arrest memo Ex. PJ and on further interrogation, Hardeep Singh accused suffered disclosure statement under section 27 of the Evidence Act Ex. PD to the effect that he has kept concealed four bags of poppy husk in the wheat field in an abandoned house and he could get those bags recovered. Pursuant to the disclosure statement supra, accused led the police party to the place of concealment and got recovered four bags containing poppy husk from an abandoned house. Two samples of 250 grams each were drawn from each bag and the remaining poppy husk of each bag on weighment came to 32 1/2 kgs. All the 8 sample parcels and the four bags containing remaining poppy husk were separately sealed by Tarsem Lal asi with his seal bearing impression TL as also with the seal of DSP bearing impression SS and seal after use was retained by DSP and Tarsem Lal ASI handed over his seal to Sadhu Singh, public witness and signed by Jagdish Chand ASI and Shamsher Singh DSP. Later site plan Ex. PK of place of recovery was prepared. On personal search of the accused Rs.80/- and one HMT were recovered which were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PL which was signed by the accused, Jagdish Chand ASI and thumb marked by Sadhu Singh, public witness. 3. Later site plan Ex. PK of place of recovery was prepared. On personal search of the accused Rs.80/- and one HMT were recovered which were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PL which was signed by the accused, Jagdish Chand ASI and thumb marked by Sadhu Singh, public witness. 3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. On 24.3.2001, ASI Tarsem Lal pw-8 was present at the spot along with other police officials. At about 8 p. m. appellant came on a tractor from the side of village Chhaba and was apprehended. The appellant was driving tractor No. PJN 5183 and was carrying five bags on the tractor. The appellant opted to get search conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer. Consequently, shamsher Singh DSP (D), Patiala-PW-2 was called at the spot and in his presence, bags were searched. Two samples of 250 gms. were drawn out of each bag and the remaining poppy husk from each bag came to 32 1/2 kgs. The samples as well as case property were taken in possession. The appellant, during interrogation, further got effected recovery of four bags of poppy husk in his wheat fields in a deserted house. The recovery was effected at the instance of the appellant and the said four bags of poppy husk were also taken in possession after drawing sealed samples out of them. The official witnesses, pw-2 Shamsher Singh DSP, PW-3 Tarsem Lal ASI and PW-5 Jagdish Chand have deposed with regard to the recovery effected from the appellant. The other official witnesses have deposed with regard to the link evidence. The official witnesses were acting in discharge of their official duty and have no reason to falsely involve the appellant in this case. 4. The appellant, on the other hand, had failed to prove his plea taken by him in his defence, when he was examined under Sec.313 Cr. P. C. , that he had been falsely involved in this case at the instance of Sardul Singh. There is nothing on record to suggest the connivance between Sardul Singh and the official witnesses. The witnesses examined by the appellant in defence have failed to rebut the testimony of the official witnesses regarding recovery effected from the appellant. 5. Dw-3 Sadhu Singh, independent witness, however, did not support the prosecution case. There is nothing on record to suggest the connivance between Sardul Singh and the official witnesses. The witnesses examined by the appellant in defence have failed to rebut the testimony of the official witnesses regarding recovery effected from the appellant. 5. Dw-3 Sadhu Singh, independent witness, however, did not support the prosecution case. In his cross-examination, he admitted his thumb impressions on Ex. PB to Ex. PF, Ex. PJ and Ex. PL. He has failed to explain as to under what circumstances, his thumb impressions were obtained on blank papers. The fact that the appellant was driving the tractor in question at the time of recovery, leads to the inference that the appellant was in conscious possession of the recovered contraband. There is nothing on record to suggest that otherwise. Hence, no ground for interference by this Court is made out. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.