STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. BALDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this bunch of appeals/special leave petitions the following questions of law (besides other questions of law and facts) fall for determination:

(2.) The above questions came up for consideration before a two-Judge Bench of this Court in (State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh)1, 1994 S.C.C. (Cri.) 634 and it answered them as under :

(3.) In (Ali Mustaffa Abdul Rahman Moosa v. State of Kerala)2, 1995 S.C.C. (Cri.) 32, a submission was made on behalf of the State of Kerala to reconsider the judgment in Balbir Singh's case in view of the judgment of the Constitution Bench of this Court in (Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection)(Investigation)3, 1974 S.C.C. (Tax) 114. wherein it was observed that where the test of admissibility of evidence lay on relevancy (as in India and England), unless there was an express or necessarily implied prohibition in the Constitution or other law, evidence obtained as a result of illegal search or seizure was not liable to be shut out. Relying upon the above observation it was contended that even if the search and seizure of the contraband were held to be illegal, and contrary to the provisions of section 50 it would not affect the conviction because the seized articles could be used as evidence of unlawful possession. In repelling this contention the two-Judge Bench of this Court observed as under :