KULDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22nd July 2008, passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court, in Crl. Appeal No. 628-SB of 1997, dismissing the appeal of the appellant which had been filed by the appellant against his conviction by the learned Special Judge, Sangrur, under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). According to the case of the prosecution, P.W.3, Mr. Malkiat Singh, Sub-Inspector of Police Station, Bhawanigarh, was said to have been on patrol duty when a secret information was received by him that the appellant was dealing with Poppy Husk from his residence. On receipt of the said information the said Malkiat Singh, along with Head Constable Gurmail Singh, Constable Gamdoor Singh, Head Constable, Jagga Ram, PHG Rajinder Singh and SPO Hari Singh, went to the house of the appellant and upon questioning him they came to learn that he had concealed certain amount of contraband. Based on the said part of the information which was admissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, a recovery was made of four bags of Poppy Husk. At the time of seizure of the said contraband, no samples were taken by P.W.3. The same was seized by Mr. Malkiat Singh, who also sealed the same with his seal, and thereafter, the four bags were taken to the Police Station where the Station House Officer, Gurmail Singh, broke open the seals and mixed the contents of the four bags together, and took the samples therefrom and resealed the bags with his seal. At that point of time, the poppy Husk was weighed and found to be 150 kilograms Of Poppy Husk in all. A charge was framed against the appellant under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, and, ultimately, he was found guilty and sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two and a half years.

(3.) Aggrieved by the said order of conviction, the appellant moved the High Court, which agreed with the findings of the Trial Court, and dismissed the appeal. It is against the said order of dismissal that the instant Special Leave petition was filed, and this appeal arises therefrom.