RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant faced trial for the offence punishable under Section 21 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short-NDPS Act) and was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.05.2004 passed by Special Judge, Amritsar.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the basis of secret information on 05.05.2002 received by ASI Balwinder Singh, he sent a ruqa (Ex.PA) to the police station on the basis of which formal FIR (Ex.PA/1) was recorded. One Balbir Singh was joined in the police party as a witness. The appellant was apprehended near telephone exchange and after giving him option to get his search effected before the Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer, DSP City Jagdish Singh was called as per the option exercised by the appellant. On search being conducted, the appellant was found in possession of 30 grams of smack wrapped in a glazed paper, out of which 5 gram of smack was separated as sample. Separate parcels of sample as well as remaining smack were prepared and sealed with the seal of Investigating Officer Balwinder Singh bearing impression 'BS', by Inspector Prabhdev Singh bearing impression 'PS' and DSP Jagdish Singh by his impression 'JS'. The case property was handed over to SHO Prabhdev Singh, who kept it in double lock and produced the same before the Area Magistrate on the next day. The sample was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and vide report Ex.PJ, it was found to be of smack. After completion of investigation, challan against the appellant was presented in Court.

(3.) When confronted with the incriminating evidence against the appellant at the time of recording his statement under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, he denied the same and pleaded his false implication. He stated in his defence that on the relevant day, he was going towards Sultanwind Road and had an exchange of hot words with the police, who wanted to impound his scooter despite all valid documents available with the appellant. He was falsely implicated in this case.