ROHTAS ALIAS BUNDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ROHTAS alias Bunder son of Bhim Singh resident of Bamdolli, District Rohtak stands convicted under section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short to be referred as 'the Act') and has been sentenced to undergo RI for ten years. However, no fine has been imposed.

(2.) THE factual matrix of the prosecution case is that on 27.2.1989, PW6 SI Shankar Lal along with other police officials went to village Bamdolli along with the appellant for the purpose of effecting recovery of the case property involved in case bearing FIR No. 39 of 1989 for the offence punishable under section 457/380 of the Indian Penal Code. When they reached the house of the appellant and after recovery of the case property in the above said case was effected, SI Shankar Lal at once spotted 20 bags lying in a room situated in the east of the house of the appellant. They were stacked in the northern portion of the room. They were checked and were found to be containing poppy straw weighing 35 kilograms each. From each of the bag 50 gms of poppy straw was taken and was put in a packet. Sample so drawn as representative of all the bags was sealed with the seal bearing seal impression SL and the bags and the remaining poppy straw were also sealed with the same seal and the case property was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PB. Sample of the seal was handed over to one Head-Constable Ishwar Singh PW-5. The neighbours of the appellant had not joined the investigation out of fear of Rohtas alias Bunder appellant. The ruqa Ex. P/2 was sent to the police station for recording formal FIR and consequently, the formal FIR Ex. PA was recorded by SI Som Dutt PW4. The statements of the witnesses were also recorded at the spot. After completing investigation at the spot, the appellant, the witnesses and the case property were brought before PW7 Raj Kumar Inspector/SHO of police station Bahadurgarh. He then made inquiries from the appellant, and witnesses and affixed his seal marked RK on the sample packet produced by Shankar Lal SI. He also took out sample from all the bags and sealed the samples so drawn and the bags as well. The case property was then entrusted to Moharar Head Constable of the police station. On receipt of report of the Chemical Examiner to the effect that the bags were containing poppy straw, the appellant was challaned in the present case.

(3.) IN support of its case, the prosecution has examined seven witnesses. PW1 is Kali Ram Inspector. He has submitted the final report under section 173 Cr.P.C. PW2 is Vijay Singh, Head Constable. His evidence is of formal character as he has tendered his affidavit Ex. PX. Similarly PW3 Daya Chand Constable has tendered his affidavit Ex. PY. SI Som Datt has been examined as PW4. He recorded the formal FIR on receipt of ruqa from SI Shankar Lal. Ishwar Singh Head Constable is examined as PW5. He is the witness of the recovery. He has unfolded the prosecution story by stating that contraband was recovered from the house of Rohtas alias Bunder appellant in a room situated in the east of his house when Rohtas alias Bunder was taken for the purpose of effecting recovery in FIR No. 39 of 1989 registered against him under section 457/380 IPC. He also talks of other formalities done at the spot.