BALWINDER SINGH (BINDA) Vs. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeals arise from the common judgment dtd. 8/7/2013 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh deciding the Murder Reference (Murder Reference No. 5 of 2012 titled Narcotics Control Bureau, Chandigarh Zonal Unit v. Balwinder Singh @ Binda) prepared by the Judge, Special Court for confirmation of death sentence, appeal (CRA No. D-365-DB of 2012) preferred by Balwinder Singh (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1136 of 2014) and the appeal (CRA No. D-371-DB of 2012) filed by Satnam Singh (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1933 of 2014).

(2.) The incident in question relates back to 11/12/2005, when as per the version of the prosecution, the Narcotics Control Bureau (For short 'NCB') received secret information that some persons who were indulging in the sale of contraband, were travelling in a white coloured Indica car from Amritsar to supply contraband at a bus stand at Chandigarh. On 12/12/2005, at 01:00 am, a naka was laid by the NCB team at Chandigarh and two independent witnesses [Mukesh Kumar and Sonu (PW-1)] were associated in the investigation. At 03:15 am, the NCB team noticed that a car [White coloured Indica Car bearing registration number HR-01-J-9639 (Marked as P-1)] coming from Sector 25 and heading towards Sector 24, Chandigarh, stopped at a little distance from the place of naka and two persons wearing turbans alighted from the car and ran away. However, the third person, also wearing a turban who had later on disclosed his name as Satnam Singh (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1933 of 2014), remained seated in the car.

(3.) Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, both the appellants approached the High Court. A Murder Reference under Sec. 366 Cr.P.C. was also forwarded to the High Court in view of the death sentence awarded by the Special Court, Chandigarh to the appellant - Balwinder Singh (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1136 of 2014). The entire evidence was analysed afresh by the High Court and relying on the decisions of this Court in Kanhaiyalal vs. Union of India 2008 (4) SCC 668 Ram Singh vs. Central Bureau of Narcotics (2011) 11 SCC 347 and Raj Kumar Karwal vs. Union of India (1990) 2 SCC 409 wherein, it was held that an order of conviction can be passed solely on the basis of the confession made by the accused under Sec. 67 of the NDPS Act and that such a confession before the officer of the NCB was admissible in evidence since the NCB officer is not considered as a "police officer" within the meaning of Sec. 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, both the appellants were convicted under the NDPS Act. For arriving at the said conclusion, the High Court took into consideration the statements of Balwinder Singh (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1136 of 2014) and Satnam Singh (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1933 of 2014) recorded under Sec. 67 of the Act and held them to be admissible in evidence for being used as confession against them. The deposition of the prosecution witnesses, namely, PW-1, PW-2 and PW-5, who had searched the car of Satnam Singh (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1933 of 2014) that had resulted in the recovery of 4 kgs. of heroin, was also relied on by the High Court and it was observed that Satnam Singh (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1933 of 2014) was apprehended by the NCB Officers in the vehicle in question and there was sufficient evidence to hold that he was guilty of possession of 4 kgs. of heroin.