KAILASH SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, who has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short 'NDPS Act') vide judgment dated March 18, 1987 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. l,00,000.00 (one lakh) vide subsequent order of the same date by an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, has filed this appeal from jail. The appellant was not in a position to engage any counsel and thus, Ms. Pinki Anand, Advocate, was appointed as Amicus Curiae to argue the case on behalf of the appellant.

(2.) The appeal was apparently barred by limitation but vide order dated August 31, 1987, Malik Sharief-Ud-Din, J. has condoned the delay.

(3.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that on February 14, 1986, at about 3.30 P.M. at Bus Stand, East Patel Nagar. PW4 Inspector Satendra Nath alongwith ASI Umed Singh and Head Constables Radhey Sham and Attar Singh, had apprehended the appellant who was suspected of being in possession of smack. His personal search was taken and 300 gms ofsmack/ heroin was recovered from the appellant's trouseis' right side pocket. A representative sample was taken and the sample as well as the remaining heroin were converted into sealed parcels and they were sealed with the seals of the Investigating Officer as well as of the S.H.O. The seizure memo Ex PW3/A was prepared and then Rukka Ex. PW1 A was sent, on the basis of which a case registered. The parcel containing the remaining heroin weighing 290 gms was exhibited as PI but at the time the case property was brought in the trial Court it was found that it did not bear any seals. The sample was sent for analysis to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory and the report of the CFSL Ex. PA was received showing that the sample gave positive test for heroin. It was given out in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses that efforts were made to join some public witnesses but none came forward. The prosecution story was sought to be proved through the statements of ASI Umed Singh (Public Witness 3), Inspector Satendra Nath (Public Witness 4) and Head Constable Attar Singh (Public Witness 5). Others are formal witnesses. The learned Additional Sessions Judge after believing the statements of the prosecution witnesses has found the appellant guilty of the offence.