STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. BALWANT RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent herein was put up for trial before the Additional Sessions judge, Sangrur who by judgment and order dated August 8, 1997 found the respondent guilty of the offence under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances act, 1985 (for short N. D. P. S. Act) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs. one lakh, in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2-1/2 (two and a half) years. The respondent preferred an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and haryana at Chandigarh being Criminal Appeal no. 655-SB/1997. The High Court by its impugned judgment and order of 19th February, 1999 allowed the appeal and set aside the order of conviction and sentence passed against the respondent. The State of Punjab has come up in appeal before this Court by special leave.

(2.) The facts of the case are that ASI sampuran Singh (PW3) along with ASI Surinder paul Singh (PW1) and Head Constable Satnam singh, Constable Harinder Singh and other police officials was on patrol duty. While they were at village Ahankheri, Sampuran Singh pw3 received a secret information that the respondent was selling poppyhusk in wholesale and that on the preceding night in village farid Pur Kalan, several bags of poppyhusk had been unloaded and the accused was waiting for customers. On receipt of such information, a wireless message was sent to Pritpal singh, Superintendent of Police, Malerkotla (PW2) who was requested to reach the spot. Chowkidar of village Ahankheri joined the police party and the police party reached the place indicated in the secret information. The respondent was found sitting on bags numbering 15. In the meantime, the Superintendent of police also reached there. In his presence pw3 opened the bags and found the bags to contain poppyhusk. There were 15 such bags. The contents of the bags were mixed up and two samples each weighing 500 gms. were taken. The remaining poppyhusk was packed in the same bags each containing 37 kgs. of poppyhusk. The samples were duly sealed and after necessary formalities and requirements of law were complied with a personal search of the respondent was conducted and from the person of the respondent a sum of Rs. 200/- was recovered, which was taken into possession under recovery memo Ex. PB. The sample was sent to the chemical examiner, chandigarh and on receipt of his report Exh. PH, the respondent was put up for trial. The prosecution sought to prove its case by adducing oral as well as documentary evidence. ASI surinder Pal Singh member of the raiding party was examined as PW1 while Shri Pritpal Singh, superintendent of Police was examined as pw2. The investigating officer ASI Sampuran singh was examined as PW3. The report of the chemical examiner was produced before the court marked Exh. PH.

(3.) The incriminating circumstances were put to the accused in his examination under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. There was a general denial by the respondent of all the incriminating circumstances put to him but in answer to the last question, the respondent stated that the police party was inimical towards him and he had, therefore, been falsely implicated. According to him in the year 1987 he had advanced a sum of Rs. 18,000/- to Dhan Singh and Hakamsingh. The said Dhan Singh and Hakam Singh, refused to repay the amount on demand. In the year 1990 ASI Amar Singh, ASI Sampuran singh, PW3 and sub-inspector Shamsher Singh brought him (the respondent) to the police station dhuri and falsely implicated him in a case. A relative of the respondent filed a writ petition in the High Court and a Warrant Officer was appointed by the High Court. His report. disclosed that the respondent along with Robp singh and Sajjan Singh had been illegally detained in the police station Dhuri. Ultimately, the High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 5000/- upon sub-inspector Shamsher Singh for the illegal detention of the respondent and others. On account of this police officials were inimical towards him and, therefore, sub-inspector shamsher Singh got him falsely implicated in this case.