SAHIB SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IS delayed compliance of Section 42 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the Act') acceptable?, is the question which confronts this Court in this Criminal Appeal brought by convict Sahib Singh (here -in -after referred to as 'the appellant') to assail judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated March 26, 2010 whereby learned Judge, Special Court, Patiala (here -in -after referred to as 'the trial court') has convicted and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a term of fourteen years and fine amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/ - and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for a term of one year under Section 18 of the Act.

(2.) SYNTAX of events culminating into the instant appeal, put as concisely as one may, indicates that on February 13, 2008, while present at Bus Stand, Samana in the company of a police contingent, ASI Bhinder Singh (PW1) (here -in -after referred to as 'the investigating officer') received a secret information that with the money provided by his accomplice Kuldip Singh, appellant Sahib Singh was bringing opium from Rajasthan in a truck bearing registration No. HR 37 A 4515 and if a picket was laid at T -point on the main road of village Asarpur, opium was likely to be recovered. Wasting no time, investigating officer telephonically informed Deputy Superintendent of Police, Samana; joined PW Gurbachan Singh as a public witness; accompanied by the police party, reached T -point on the main road of village Asarpur; and laid a picket there. After a while, viz. at or around 02.00 p.m. on February 13, 2008, the truck bearing registration No. HR 37 A 4515 came there. On being beaconed to stop, the appellant, who was on the wheel of the truck, stopped the truck; alighted therefrom; and on being asked by the investigating officer, disclosed his name as Sahib Singh. Investigating officer told the appellant that the plastic bag lying behind driver's seat of the truck in his possession was suspected to carry some contraband and was liable to be examined but he (the appellant) had a right to have search of the bag conducted by him or by a gazetted officer or a Magistrate. Appellant opted to have the truck frisked in the presence of a gazetted officer. Investigating officer recorded memorandum of dissent, Exhibit PA, and at or around 02.30 p.m. requested on phone Dy. S.P. Manjit Singh Brar (a gazetted officer) to reach the spot. On being so requested, Dy. S.P. Manjit Singh Brar (PW5) reached the spot and after being apprised of the facts of the case by the investigating officer, disclosed his identity before the appellant and asked the appellant if he wanted frisking of the truck to be conducted by him or by some other gazetted officer. Appellant opted to get the truck frisked by him. Memorandum of consent, Exhibit PB, was recorded in this regard. On being so directed by Dy. S.P. Manjit Singh Brar (PW5), investigating officer frisked the bag in the presence of witnesses and found it to contain opium wrapped in a polythene paper; separated two samples of ten grams each from it; and put the samples so separated in a parcel. Remainder, which weighed 24 kilograms and 800 grams, was also made into a separate parcel. Investigating officer sealed the parcels containing samples and the remainder, with his seal bearing impression "BS"; prepared a sample seal, Exhibit P1; handed over the seal, after use, to ASI Devinder Singh (PW7); took in police possession the sealed sample parcels, sealed parcel of remainder, Exhibit P3, as also the truck and its registration certificate, vide memorandum, Exhibit PC; arrested the appellant vide memorandum, Exhibit PG; frisked appellant's person vide memorandum, Exhibit PF; sent intimation (Ruqa), Exhibit PD, to the police station -whereupon a formal First Information Report (FIR, for short), Exhibit PD/1, was recorded by ASI Jagdish Kumar; recorded statements of witnesses; prepared rough site plan, Exhibit PE, of the place of recovery; and on return to the police station produced the appellant and the case property before SI Deepak Rai, the Station House Officer, who verified the facts, affixed his own seal bearing impression 'DR' on the parcels of samples and the remainder, as also on sample seal form, Exhibit P1, and deposited the case property with MHC Ajit Singh (PW2). On that very day, i.e. February 13, 2008, investigating officer withdrew the case property from Police Malkhana and the appellant from police lock up and produced them, alongwith inventory, Exhibit PK, before learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samana who, found the seals on the case property and representative samples to be intact; vide his order, Exhibit PK/1, certified the inventory, Exhibit PK, to be 'true and correct'; and directed deposit of the case property in Judicial Malkhana. Accused Kuldip Singh was arrested on February 14, 2008 vide memorandum, Exhibit PM. One sample parcel was sent to Chemical Examiner through Constable Debu Ram (PW3) and a report, Exhibit PL, confirming that the contents of sample parcel were opium, was received from the Chemical Examiner. On application, Exhibit PN, Registering Authority, Ambala made an endorsement, Exhibit PN/1, to the effect that the truck bearing registration No. HR 37A 4515 was registered in the appellant's name. On conclusion of investigation, a report in terms of sub -section (2) of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (here -in -after referred to as 'the Code') was presented before the learned trial court.

(3.) TO prove the charge against the accused, prosecution examined investigating officer, ASI Bhinder Singh (PW1) who re -asserted on oath the entire prosecution version; Dy. S.P. Manjit Singh Brar (PW5), who had supervised the proceedings leading to recovery of the contraband; ASI Devinder Singh (PW7) who had witnessed recovery of contraband from possession of the appellant, SI Deepak Rai (PW6), the then Station House Officer before whom the appellant and case property were produced immediately after recovery of the contraband; HC Ajit Singh (PW2), the Moharrir Head Constable who had kept the case property in safe custody; Constable Debu Ram (PW3), who had taken a representative sample to Chemical Examiner; Constable Shish Pal (PW4), who had deposited the case property in Judicial Malkhana; and Rakesh Kumar (PW8) who proved on record endorsement, Exhibit PN/1, according to which truck bearing registration No. HR 37A 4515 was registered in the appellant's name.