HARDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was convicted for an offence under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act- for short) vide judgment dated 17.5.2004 by the Judge, Special Court, Patiala. Vide order of the even date the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-. Hence, the present appeal. Prosecution case, as noticed by the trial Court in para Nos. 1 to 4 of its judgment, is reproduced herein below:-

(2.) Further investigation of Hardeep Singh accused revealed the identity of other person who fled away from the place of recovery as Suba Singh and the latter was identified by Parkasgh Masih HC. Later ruqa Ex.PG was sent to the Police Station through Palwinder Singh Constable which formed the basis of formal FIR Ex.PG/1. Later Tarsem Lal ASI who is the investigating officer of this case prepared site plan Ex.PH and arrest memo Ex.PJ and on further interrogation, Hardeep Singh accused suffered disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act Ex.PD to the effect that he has kept concealed four bags of poppy husk in the wheat field in an abandoned house and he could get those bags recovered. Pursuant to the disclosure statement supra, accused led the police party to the place of concealment and got recovered four bags containing poppy husk from an abandoned house. Two samples of 250 grams each were drawn from each bag and the remaining poppy husk of each bag on weighment came to 32 1/2 kgs. All the 8 sample parcels and the four bags containing remaining poppy husk were separately sealed by Tarsem Lal ASI with his seal bearing impression TL as also with the seal of DSP bearing impression SS and seal after use was retained by DSP and Tarsem Lal ASI handed over his seal to Sadhu Singh, public witness and signed by Jagdish Chand ASI and Shamsher Singh DSP. Later site plan Ex.PK of place of recovery was prepared. On personal search of the accused Rs.80/- and one HMT were recovered which were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PL which was signed by the accused, Jagdish Chand ASI and thumb marked by Sadhu Singh, public witness.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. On 24.3.2001, ASI Tarsem Lal PW-8 was present at the spot along with other police officials. At about 8 p.m. appellant came on a tractor from the side of village Chhaba and was apprehended. The appellant was driving tractor No.PJN 5183 and was carrying five bags on the tractor. The appellant opted to get search conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer. Consequently, Shamsher Singh DSP (D), Patiala-PW-2 was called at the spot and in his presence, bags were searched. Two samples of 250 gms. were drawn out of each bag and the remaining poppy husk from each bag came to 32 1/2 kgs. The samples as well as case property were taken in possession. The appellant, during interrogation, further got effected recovery of four bags of poppy husk in his wheat fields in a deserted house. The recovery was effected at the instance of the appellant and the said four bags of poppy husk were also taken in possession after drawing sealed samples out of them. The official witnesses, PW-2 Shamsher Singh DSP, PW-3 Tarsem Lal ASI and PW-5 Jagdish Chand have deposed with regard to the recovery effected from the appellant. The other official witnesses have deposed with regard to the link evidence. The official witnesses were acting in discharge of their official duty and have no reason to falsely involve the appellant in this case.