GURMAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 5-8-1999, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, convicting the accused-appellant under S. 25 of the NDPS Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and sentencing him to undergo RI for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1.00 lakhs and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for one year.

(2.) The facts in brief are that Raghubans Singh Gill, Excise and Taxation Officer, on 27-2-1989, was posted at Shambhu Excise Check Barrier. At about 11 p.m. on the night intervening 27/28-2-1989, Truck No. CHW 9495 came from Ambala side and one person by the name of Makhan Singh gave the documents of the truck at the check barrier for checking and considering the documents to be suspicious, he (Raghubans Singh Gill) himself went to the truck, which was parked on the road near the barrier and meanwhile, said Makhan Singh slipped away. The said truck along with its contents was detained. From the registration certificate, the name of the owner was found to be accused, Gurmail Singh. HC Nirmal Singh and Constable Paramjit Singh were deputed to watch the truck. On the morning of 28-2-1989, Raghubans Singh Gill became off duty and came on duty on 3-3-1989. On the same day, at about 4 p.m., Inspector Gurmit Singh Randhawa and other officials visited the barrier in connection with patrol duty and at that time, he told them that he had detained the said truck with its contents under suspicious circumstances and gave his report Ex. PE to Inspector Gurmit Singh Randhawa. Thereafter, Inspector Gurmit Singh Randhawa and other Police Officials went to the truck and the truck was got unloaded. On search, 109 bags of poppy and 10 bags of oil cake were recoverd from the said truck. On weighment, each bag of poppy was found containing 36 kgs of poppy. Sample of 250 gms was taken from each bag of poppy and thereafter the samples and the bulk of poppy were duly sealed and the same were taken into possession along with 10 bags of oil cake and the said truck, vide recovery memo. As per the statement of Gurmit Singh, DSP, after the completion of investigation, the challan was put in the Court.

(3.) Initially, accused-Gurmail Singh was charged under S. 15 of the Act on 6-1-1992. Evidence of the prosecution was recorded. Thereafter, the APP for the State closed the prosecution evidence. The statement of accused under S. 313, Cr. P.C. was also recorded and thereafter, the accused tendered certain documents in his defence. Thereafter, on 23-12-1996, the accused closed the defence evidence. Arguments were heard and the case was fixed for orders for 24-12-1996. The learned Additional Sessions Judge found that no offence under S. 15 of the Act was made out against the accused and rather offence under S. 25 of the Act was made out against him. Accordingly, exercising the powers under S. 216, Cr. P.C., the charge was altered and reframed under S. 25 of the Act, vide order dated 24-12-1996. Thereafter, the prosecution evidence was recorded again. After recording the statement of the accused and after the accused had closed the defence evidence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, on 5-8-1999, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant, as referred to above. Aggrieved against this judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge that the accused-appellant, Gurmail Singh, has filed the present appeal in this Court.