MOHINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was intercepted by the police party headed by PW-2 ASI Mohinder Singh in the area of village Tungwali on 23-12-1983 when he was allegedly carrying contraband article i.e. opium which was found to be weighing two kgs. ten grams of opium were separated a sample; and the remaining opium was put a Tin Dabba Exhibit P1 and sealed by PW-2 ASI Mohinder Singh with his seal bearing impression M.S:. The rough site plan Exhibit PC of the place of interception was prepared. Ruqa Exhibit PC was despatched to the police station for registration of the case on the basis of which formal FIR Exhibit PC/i was recorded. After the report of the Analyst Exhibit PE was received that the contents of the sample were opium the petitioner was challaned and tried under Section 9(a) of the Opium Act. He was convicted under Section 9(2) of the Opium Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- or in. default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month by the learned trial Magistrate. His conviction and sentence were upheld by the Lower Appellate Court.

(2.) The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant has been that no independent person was joined during the investigation of the case. The petitioner was not intercepted or caught as claimed by the Investigating Officer PW -2 ASI Mohinder Singh but was arrested from village Khudi Kalan in the presence of Natha Singh Sarpanch and Jagrup Singh Member Panchayat, and the opium has been foisted on him because the petitioner did not pull on well the police people.

(3.) It is true that a, criminal investigation cannot be left to state of normlessness and certain criteria prescribed for such investigation must be adhered to. However when one is confronted with the situation as is in the given case and when the alleged offender takes a plea of total innocence and false involvement he is also required to bring some evidence on record.