SARABJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prosecution story is as under :- On the intervening night of 11th and 12th December, 1992, Sub Inspector Gurbax Singh (PW-2) Station House Officer of Police Station, Amargarh had laid a Nakabandi at the bridge of the canal minor in the area of village Dialpur Chhanna. Att about 2-00 A.M. they spotted a truck bearing No. PJC-3513 approaching the Naka party. When the truck reached near the police party, Sub Inspector Gurbax Singh stopped the truck which was also encircled and four persons, namely, Kashmir Singh, the driver of the truck, Karam Singh sitting beside him and Dhanna Singh and Darshan Singh alias Kala sitting in the rear of the truck, were apprehended. These four persons when questioned told Sub Inspector Gurbax Singh that they were carrying 100 bags of poppy-husk in the truck. On this Sub Inspector Gurbax Singh sent a wireless message to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Malerkotla, Sukhdev Singh Brar (PW-5), who too reached the spot. A search of the truck was thereafter made and 100 bags of poppy-husk were recovered each containing 40 Kgs. of poppy-husk Two samples of 250 grams each were taken from all the bags and remaining poppy husk was duly sealed. The registration certificate of the truck further revealed that it was owned by accused Sarabjit Singh son of Gurdev Singh. No attempt was apparently made to arrest Sarabjit Singh but he appeared in the police Station voluntarily on December 18, 1992 and was taken into custody. The Chemical Examiner in his report opined that the contents of the samples were in fact poppy-husk. On the completion of the investigation all the accused other than Sarabjit Singh were charged under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), whereas Sarabjit Singh accused was charged for the offence punishable under section 25 of the Act and as they pleaded not guilty, were brought to trial.

(2.) THE prosecution, in support of its case, examined Sub Inspector Gurmukh Singh (PW-1), who had also been a member of the Naka party and had witnessed the search and seizure; Sub Inspector Gurbax Singh (PW-2), who had recorded the FIR; Constable Ram Singh (PW-3) and Head Constable Tarlochan Singh (PW-4), who were tendered for cross-examination; and Deputy Superintendent of Police Sukhdev Singh Brar (PW-5), the officer who had been summoned to the place of recovery by a wireless message and had also witnessed the recovery.

(3.) THE trial Court noted that the provisions of Section 50 of the Act were not attracted to the facts of the case as the seizure had been made from a truck and not from the person of the accused. It was also observed that the provisions of Section 42 of the Act were also not applicable as the recovery had been effected in the course of a Nakabandi and not on the receipt of any prior information. The Court also held that the factum of recovery had been proved by the evidence of Sub Inspector Gurmukh Singh and Sub Inspector Gurbax Singh, the Investigating Officers and Sukhdev Singh Brar, D.S.P. (PW-5), who had also reached the place soon after the seizure. The trial Court further observed that Head Constable Gurdarshan Singh, who had been sent to arrange for some independent witness and had also brought the scale for weighing the samples had not been examined was of no significance. The Court also found that the prosecution story that the seized property had been deposited in the Malkhana without loss of time stood proved from the affidavit (Ex.PK) of PW-4 Tarlochan Singh Head Constable. The Court finally observed that though Sarabjit Singh accused had not been arrested from the spot but as he was admittedly the owner of the truck in question, a presumption had to be raised against him by virtue of the provisions of Section 35(1) of the Act and that the presumption had not been rebutted by him as all that had been said in defence was that he did not have the knowledge of the contents of the truck. The defence story was also rejected as lacking credibility. The trial Court accordingly convicted accused Kashmir Singh, Karam Singh, Dhanna Singh and Darshan Singh under Section 15 of the Act and Sarabjit Singh under Section 25 thereof and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twelve years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,50,000/- and in default of payment of fine of further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years.