Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1218 (HP)

Vinod Kumar v. State of H. P.

2016-06-29

SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2016
JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. The instant appeal stands directed against the impugned judgment of 3.12.2013 rendered by the learned Special Judge-I, Sirmaur, District at Nahan, H.P., in Sessions trial No. 17-ST/7 of 2013, whereby the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant (hereinafter referred to as “accused”) for his committing offence punishable under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for shot “the Act”), as follows:- “To undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for six months.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 25.1.2013, police party headed by PW-7 ASI Rajesh Pal was present at Do Sarka Mour in connection with traffic checking. At about 4.30 p.m. the vehicle bearing registration No. CH-04E-9616 being driven by accused Vinod Kumar was stopped. On demand of documents by the police officials, accused only produced the insurance certificate. The car occupied by the accused was checked and during checking one blue black colour bag was found in the dickey of the car containing vials of Rexcof cough syrup. In the meantime tractor bearing registration No. HP-71-1372 reached on the spot in which PW-1 Ram Chander and one Shri Varinder were sitting. They were joined by PW-7 and in their presence the bag was taken out from the dickey of the car. On counting the rexcof cough syrup vials were found to be 270. The accused could not produce any licence/permit for carrying these cough syrup vials in his car. photographs were clicked and thereafter the aforesaid vials were put back into the same bag which was sealed with seal impression V. NCB form was drawn. The case property was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW-1/A. Rukaa Ex.PW-3/A was prepared, on the basis of which FIR Ex. PW-3/B came to be registered. Report of chemical examiner Ex. PW-7/C was obtained. After completing all codal formalities and on conclusion of the investigation into the offence, allegedly committed by the accused challan was prepared and filed in the Court. 3. The accused stood charged by the learned trial Court for his committing offence punishable under Section 22 of the Act to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses. 3. The accused stood charged by the learned trial Court for his committing offence punishable under Section 22 of the Act to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses. On closure of prosecution evidence the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded in which he pleaded innocence and claimed false implication. He chose to lead evidence in defence and examine one witness. 5. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court returned findings of conviction against the accused for his committing offence punishable under Section 22 of the Act. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the accused has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court standing not based on a proper appreciation of evidence on record rather theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation of material on record. Hence he contends qua the findings of conviction being reversed by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs being replaced by findings of acquittal. 7. The learned Deputy Advocate General has with considerable force and vigour contended qua the findings of conviction recorded by the Court below standing based on a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record and theirs not necessitating interference rather meriting vindication. 8. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side has with studied care and incision evaluated the entire evidence on record. 9. The prosecution case qua effectuation of recovery of 270 vials of Rexcof cough syrup from the dickey of the car bearing registration No. CH-04E-9616 driven at the relevant time by the accused, recovery whereof stood effectuated under memo PW-1/A by the Investigating Officer at the site of occurrence, stands proven by the depositions of official witnesses. 9. The prosecution case qua effectuation of recovery of 270 vials of Rexcof cough syrup from the dickey of the car bearing registration No. CH-04E-9616 driven at the relevant time by the accused, recovery whereof stood effectuated under memo PW-1/A by the Investigating Officer at the site of occurrence, stands proven by the depositions of official witnesses. The depositions of the official witnesses acquire a hue of veracity, given the non-occurrence of any improvements as well as embellishments in their respective depositions qua the apposite factum probandum disclosed in their respective examinations-in-chief vis-à-vis their previous statements recorded in writing also there occurs no contradiction in their respective depositions comprised in their examinations-in-chief vis-à-vis their respective cross-examinations whereby hence it is to be firmly held of their respective testimonies qua the factum of effectuation of recovery of the item of psychotropic substance under memo PW-1/A by the investigating Officer at the site of occurrence from the dickey of the car driven by the accused, holding vigor as well as probative tenacity. Apart there from when the testimonies of the official witnesses do not suffer from taint of any intra-se contradictions, consequently, their respective testimonies qua effectuation of recovery of item of psychotropic substance under memo PW-1/A by the investigating Officer at the site of occurrence from the dickey of the car driven by the accused are to be amplifyingly concluded to be both credible as well as trustworthy. 10. Be that as it may the independent witness (PW-1) associated by the Investigating Officer in the apposite proceedings commenced and concluded by him at the site of occurrence also lends support besides corroboration to the testimonies of the official witnesses. The independent witness who appeared as PW-1 has disposed in harmony vis-à-vis the testimonies of the official witnesses qua effectuation of recovery of the item of psychotropic substance under memo PW-1/A by the investigating Officer at the site of occurrence from the dickey of the car driven by the accused. Consequently with the independent witness lending corroboration qua the version espoused by the official witnesses qua the effectuation of recovery of the item of psychotropic substance under memo PW-1/A by the investigating Officer at the site of occurrence from the dickey of the car driven by the accused, a formidable conclusion stands garnered of the prosecution succeeding in proving the genesis of the prosecution case. 11. 11. The only contention addressed before this Court by the learned counsel for the accused for constraining this Court to reverse the findings of conviction and consequent sentence imposed by the learned trial Court upon the accused stands grooved in the factum of the Investigating Officer, though displayed by PW-3 in his testimony comprised in his cross-examination of many vehicles, at the relevant time, crossing the relevant site of occurrence, yet his omitting to associate them as witnesses in the apposite proceedings, omission whereof he contends to be deliberate as well as wilful, for smothering the truth of the prosecution case. He also contends of hence the testimony of PW-3 holding no sway. The aforesaid submission holds no force as the numerical strength of the independent witnesses who stands associated by the Investigating Officer in the apposite proceedings, is insignificant for holding an inference qua an unclouded hue of impartisanship besides transparency not percolating the apposite proceedings held by the investigating Officer at the site of occurrence rather the qualitative creditworthiness of even a solitary independent witness associated by the Investigating Officer in the apposite proceedings held by him at the site of occurrence is sufficient, to lend vigor and strength to the prosecution case unless the testimony of the independent witness stands ridden with any blemish of any improvement or embellishment vis-à-vis his previous statement recorded in writing or stands ingrained with a vice of his contradicting the testimonies of other prosecution witnesses. Also the testimony of the independent witness would be sufficient to constrain this Court to hold of hence with his lending corroboration to the prosecution case, its acquiring an undenuded force unless of course the independent witness associated by the Investigating Officer in the relevant proceedings held by him at the site of occurrence unravels in his testimony of his lending a tutored version qua the occurrence or his being a stock witness also there occurring unfoldments therein of his under duress or compulsion exercised upon him by the Investigating Officer, his coming to corroborate the testimonies of the official witnesses. Contrarily, omission of the aforesaid unfoldments in his deposition personificatory of his testimony standing stained with a blemish of interestedness or bias would give a firm impetus to a conclusion, of his testimony being trustworthy besides inspiring consequently with his corroborating the testimonies of the official witnesses can not render his deposition to be discardable dehors the factum of the Investigating Officer not associating despite availability other independent witnesses especially when for reasons aforestated it is not the numerical strength of the independent witnesses associated by the Investigating Officer in the relevant proceedings rather the credibility of an independent witness, even if singular, holding sinew for concluding there from of his testimony being inspiring besides trustworthy. In sequel when this Court holds qua the testimony of PW-1 being creditworthy, as a corollary the lack of association of independent witnesses by the Investigating Officer other than the one associated by him, though available, does not stain the investigations conducted by him. In aftermath, the aforesaid submission stands rejected. 12. A wholesome analysis of the evidence on record portrays that the appreciation of evidence as done by the learned trial Court does not suffer from any perversity and absurdity nor it can be said that the learned trial Court in recording findings of conviction has committed any legal misdemeanor, in as much, as, its mis-appreciating the evidence on record or its omitting to appreciate relevant and admissible evidence. In aftermath this Court does not deem it fit and appropriate that the findings of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court merit interference. 13. In view of the above discussion, I find no merit in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed and the judgment of the learned trial Court is maintained and affirmed. Record of the learned trial Court be sent back forthwith.