RAJBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.4.2004 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissing the criminal miscellaneous petition filed by the two Appellants herein under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying for quashing the order dated 21.9.2003 whereby the Appellants were convicted under Section 58 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act').

(2.) The case in hand has a chequerred history. Appellant No. 1 herein was Sub Inspector Rajbir Singh of P.S. Sadar, Dabwali and Appellant No. 2 - Satbir Singh, was the then Tehsildar of Dabwali, District Sirsa, Haryana. They were both prosecution witnesses in connection with a case registered as FIR No. 149 dated 7.8.2002 under Section 17 & 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act against one Hanuman son of Net Ram, on the ground that the said Hanuman was in possession of opium in contravention of the aforesaid provisions.

(3.) Appellant No. 1 Rajbir Singh investigated the aforesaid case and filed a charge-sheet against said Hanuman, on the basis of which the trial started. After the trial was concluded, the learned Trial Court not only found that the accused was not guilty of the charge and consequently acquitted him, but also found that the aforesaid initiation and registration of the case against Hanuman was the result and outcome of a conspiracy hatched by S.I. Rajbir Singh and Satbir Singh (PW-2), who was the then Tehsildar of Dabwali, District Sirsa, for putting pressure upon Satpal son of accused Hanuman, to abandon his rights over 75 Kanals of land under his tenancy. The Trial Court held that due to the aforesaid conspiracy for putting pressure upon Satpal, it was decided by the Investigating Officer Rajbir Singh in collusion with the then Tehsildar Satbir Singh, to implicate Hanuman, the father of Satpal in a false case. The Trial Court has referred to the aforesaid conspiracy in its findings in the following manner: