STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. MEHNGA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ASI Jagdish Singh (PW.2) was heading a Police party on 30.1.1986 when he intercepted the accused in the area of village Bohra. The accused was carrying a bag containing poppy husk which after recovery was found to be 20 Kg. in weight. A sample weighing 250 Grams was taken out of the lot and the remaining material was taken into possession in a sealed parcel. On analysis, the Chemical Examiner reported the contents of the sample packet to be Coarse Powder Poppy Head. After completion of the investigation, the accused was arraigned for trial for an offence under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The prosecution examined HC Gehlan Singh (PW.1) and ASI Jagdish Singh (PW.2) and closed the evidence after tendering the Chemical Examiner's report Ext. PD in evidence. The accused when examined under Section 313, Cr.P.C. denied all the incriminating allegations of the prosecution claiming false implication and innocence.

(2.) THE trial Court vide impugned judgment acquitted the accused of the charge solely on the ground that the Investigating Officer Officer ASI Jagdish Singh (PW.2) was not clothed with statutory authority/jurisdiction under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 to arrest the accused and to search his person. In other words, the trial Court took the view that the entire investigation was bad in law and for this view placed reliance on a decision of this Court rendered in Criminal Appeal No.557 -SB, of 1986 (Karam Singh v. State of Punjab) decided on 20.3.1987, reported in 1987(2) All India Criminal Law Reporter 795 (Pb. and Hry.). Feeling aggrieved against the order of acquittal State filed appeal which was admitted by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.11.1988. The appeal is being finally disposed of vide this judgment.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the State of Punjab has argued that though Karam Singh's case (supra) was in existence when followed by the trial Court while passing the impugned order but the said judgment does not now hold field as the same has been set -aside by the Supreme Court and as such, the order of acquittal be set - aside and the State appeal be allowed.