BALWANT SINGH @ BANTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three appeals No. 285-DB of 1999, 343-DB of 1999 and 345-DB of 1999 arise out of the following facts :-

(2.) AT about 11.10 P.M. on June 2, 1997, DSP Pritpal Singh (PW-1) alongwith a police party was holding a Nakabandi on the canal bridge near village Mial. In the meanwhile, one Didar Singh Sarpanch, a resident of village Achgal Khurd also reached there. As the two were conversing with each other, they saw a truck coming from the side of village Mial Khurd and on seeing the police party, the driver suddenly stopped the truck, arousing its suspicion. The truck was accordingly surrounded and the three accused were asked to alight from it. They were interrogated and on enquiry the driver revealed that he was Om Parkash, whereas the other persons sitting alongside identified themselves as Arif, Balwant Singh alias Banta, and Surinder Singh alias Sinda. DSP Pritpal Singh then told the accused that he intended to conduct a search of the truck and if they so desired, the search could be made in the presence of a Magistrate. The accused, however, stated that they had full faith in him and had no objection to search by him. This statement was recorded in the shape of a consent memo. The truck was thereafter searched and 110 bags of maize were first recovered and from underneath these bags, 60 bags each containing 35 kgs. of poppy-husk were taken out. Samples of poppy-husk were taken from each of the bags and were duly sealed. A ruqa was also sent to Police Station, Samana and on its basis a formal FIR was drawn up at 11.20 P.M. on June 2, 1997. On the completion of the investigation, the accused were charged for an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and as they pleaded not guilty, were brought to trial.

(3.) THE prosecution case was then put to the accused and their statements recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The denied the allegations levelled against them and stated that they had been involved in a false case for various reasons. They also examined one Sahib Singh as DW-1 in their defence.