AMIT KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prosecution story is as under :- On July 10, 1994 a police party headed by PW-4 Inspector Gurmail Singh of CIA Staff, Samana comprising amongst others PW-7 SI Purshottam Singh reached village Muradpur on the receipt of an information that some terrorists were hiding nearby. While in the village Inspector Gurmail Singh received further information that a truck bearing registration No. UHQ-554 LP loaded with poppy husk in which the four accused were travelling was coming from the side of Patiala towards village Muradpur and in case a nakabandi was held in village Danipur, the four persons alongwith the truck and the poppy husk could be apprehended. Finding that the information was reliable, Inspector Gurmail Singh sent a ruqa (Exh. PD) to the Police Station through Constable Jagjit Singh and on its basis, an F.I.R. was recorded by Sub Inspector Gurmail Singh, the SHO, Police Station Samana. A nakabandi was accordingly arranged and at about 1.30 A.M., the truck in question came from the side of village Khanpur and was stopped. The police party found that the truck was being driven by accused Kashmir Singh whereas the other three accused were sitting in it. Kashmir Singh and Balbur Singh accused, however, managed to escape under the cover of darkness whereas accused Motta Singh and Amit Kumar, who were sitting on the front seat, were apprehended. Inspector Gurmail Singh thereafter sent a wireless message on which PW6 DSP Virinder Pal Singh came to the spot. A public witness Labh Singh was also joined in the nakabandi. DSP Virinder Pal Singh gave his personal search to the accused and thereafter searched the truck and 50 bags of poppy husk, each containing about 38 kgs., were recovered. 250 gms. of poppy husk was taken from each of the bags and the rest of the poppy husk was sealed at the spot by the D.S.P. Certain other documents were also taken into possession. Inspector Gurmail Singh also sent a special report (Exh. PL) from the spot. The samples of poppy husk, seized from the truck, were duly sent to the Chemical Examiner, who opined that the incriminating article was poppy husk. Accused Kahsmir Singh and Balbir Singh were arrested on July 26, 1994 and on the completion of the investigation, the accused were charged 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.

(2.) IN support of its case, the prosecution examined, inter alia, PW-4 Inspector Gurmail Singh, the Investigating Officer who deposed with regard to the seizure; PW-6 DSP Virinder Pal Singh, who stated to the manner in which the recovery had been made; and PW-7 SI Parshottam Singh, who corroborated the version given by Inspector Gurmail Singh (PW-4). Labh Singh aforesaid was however, given up as having been won over. Certain affidavits/documents constituting the link evidence as also the report of the Chemical Examiner were also tendered in evidence.

(3.) THE trial Court concluded that though Labh Singh had not been examined, as having been won over by the accused, yet even otherwise, as his name had not found mention in the F.I.R. and the search had been made at a very inconvenient time, his presence was difficult to believe and it appeared that he was a witness at the beck and call of the police. The Court, however, held that notwithstanding the fact that no independent witness had been examined there was no ground to disbelieve the rest of the evidence, though it was based on the testimony of official witnesses. The court also held that as the search had been conducted by DSP Virinder Pal Singh, who was a gazetted officer, it could not be said that there was any violation of the provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of the Act. The Court further found that as Kashmir Singh and Balbir Singh had escaped at the time of nakabandi, their identity had not been proved and having held as above (while acquitting Kashmir Singh and Balbir Singh) convicted accused Amit Kumar and Motta Singh for the offences for which they had been charged and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 12 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each and in default thereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two years.