RANI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rani, a convict in Sessions Case No. 46 of 2002, has brought this appeal, under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C., for short), against judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.09.2002 passed by Judge, Special Court, Jalandhar (trial judge, for short), convicting and sentencing her to rigorous imprisonment for a term of ten years in addition to payment of fine amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for a term of three months, under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for short, the Act). State is contesting the appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the parties besides going through record of the case. Factual Matrix:

(2.) On completion of investigation and receipt of report, Exhibit PD, from Chemical Examiner, a report, as required by Section 173(2), Cr.P.C., was prepared and was presented before the trial judge, who complied with the provisions of Section 207, Cr.P.C., and upon consideration of the record of the case and documents submitted therewith, and after hearing submissions of the appellant and the prosecution, formed an opinion that there was ground for presuming that the appellant had committed an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Act, which was triable exclusively by him, and, accordingly, framed in writing a charge against the appellant who pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. It may be added here that Bur Singh could not be arrested and the appellant alone was put to trial.

(3.) Prosecution examined Investigating Officer, ASI Yograj as PW2 and HC Karnail Singh as PW1 to bring on record recovery of the contraband and other aspects of investigation; ASI Pardeep Singh as PW3 to show that the appellant was arrested on 08.03.2002; DSP Jasdip Singh as PW5 to say that the Investigating Officer, before deposit of the case property in the police Malkhana had produced it before him; HC Jaswinder Singh as PW6 to prove his affidavit, Exhibit PF, to the effect that case property was deposited with him and he had sent the sealed sample parcels to the office of Chemical Examiner, and CII Amarjit Singh as PW4 to place on record his affidavit, Exhibit PE, to the effect that the sealed sample parcels were taken to, and deposited in, the office of Chemical Examiner by him.