SUNIL KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of Crl.A. No. 23/89 and Crl.A. No. 166/88. The appellants in both these appeals were apprehended at the same time while travelling on a two wheeler scooter along with a third person.

(2.) Vide two separate judgments/orders sentence dated 29.1188/ 10 12.88 the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, New Delhi convicted the appelignts under Section 21 of the Narcotic Durgs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also to pay a fine of Rs One lac or in default suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two years.

(3.) The story of the prosecution is that for some days perior to 23.12.86 the police bad information that some persons used to supply heroin to their known parties by coming near Shivaji Restaurant at Bhagat Singb Marg, New Delhi. On 23.12.86 SI Surinder Singh was present in office of the Crime Branch at Police Headquarters when he received secret information that three persons will come on a two wheeler scooter at Shivaji Restaurant, Bhagat Singh Marg, and will deliver heroid to their respective parties at about 5.30 P.M. On the basis of the prior information as well as Secret information received that day a raiding party consisting of SI Om Prakash, SI Jagpal Singh. HC Harbir Singh and 3-4 constables was organized by SI Surindar Singh. All of them went near Arora Pan Bhandar situtated at Bhagat Singh Marg near ShivaJi Stadium. SI Surinder Singh asked 8-10 persons to join the raiding party but they declined by expressing their inability and went away. SI Sukesh Kumar and one constable of Police Station Mandir Marg also met the party there by chance. They were also apprised of the secret informotion and were included in the raiding party. They picketted a Nakabandi near that place in such a manner that their presence was not felt by the anybody. At about 5.30 PM one two wheeler scooter driven by Surjit Singh, appellant arrived there. One Muni Lal and the appellant, Sunil Kumar were occupying pillion seat of the scooter. On the pointing out of the Informer they were apprehended while Surjit Singh, appellant was parking the scooter. SI Jagpal Singh PW8 informed Sunil Kumar appellant that they were police officers and they wanted to search them because the had information that they had heroin. They also told the appellants that they were at liberty to take their search and also if they desired their search before any Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. But the appellant, Sunil Kumar and others declined either to search any member of the police party to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. The appellant, Sunil Kumar was then search by SI Jagpal Singh. From the right pocket of his pant heroin wrapped in a wax paper was recovered. It weighed 150 grams. 10 grams was separated as sample. The sample and the remaining heroin were separately sealed in two cloth parcels and sealed with the seal impression JPS belonging to SI Jagpal Singb. Form CFSL was also filled up at the spot. Case property was seized vide Memo Ex., PW4/A. Jagpal Singh also prepared rukka Ex. PW8/A and sent it along with the case property and from CFSL to police station Mandir Marg through constable Harbir Singh for registration of the case and also for sealing the case with property the seal impression of the SHO. The site plan Ex. PW8/B was also prepared by him. He also subjected the appellant Sunil Kumar to a personal search and prepared the personal search memo Ex. PW4/ in his own hand. The sample parcel of this case was taken to CFSL by PW6 Ram Daras constable on 2.1.87. The report of the CFSL is Ex. PW2/A according to which the sample gave the positive test for heroin. After completion of necessary investigation the challan was filed in the cour.t and the appellants were convicted and sentenced as stated above.