STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. DARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by special leave against the order of acquittal dated March 28, 1972, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Feroze-pore.

(2.) ON May 21, 1970, Police Inspector Sudarshan Singh, Sub-Inspector Chaman Lai, Assistant Sub-Inspector Pyare Lal, Shri Bhatnagar, Assistant Superintendent of Police (under training) and some other Constables were on patrol duty. When the party reached near the cremation ground beyond Basti Bhatian, the respondent was seen coming from the opposite direction. On seeing the police, he tried to slip away. He was, however, apprehended on suspicion and on his personal search he was found carrying a packet, in a piece of cloth, containing 1300 grams of opium wrapped in glazed paper. A sample of opium was taken out and sealed in a parcel. The remaining opium was also separately sealed into another parcel. Both these parcels were taken into possession vide memo. Exhibit P-A. After the completion of the investigation, the respondent was sent up for trial before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepore. The prosecution examined Inspector Sudarshan Singh P. W. 3, Sub-Inspector Chaman Lal P. W. 1 and Assistant Sub-Inspector Pyare Lal P. W. 2. In the course of the trial, the respondent made an application that a sample of the alleged opium be got analysed at his expense. This request was acceded to, another sample was drawn out and sent to the Asstt. Chemical Examiner, Punjab, Chandigarh, for analysis. About this sample, it was reported by him that it contained 12% morphine. The earlier sample which had been sent to the Assistant Chemical Examiner, Punjab, Amritsar, was reported to be containing 3% morphine. Upon this, the learned trial Magistrate summoned Dr. S. K. Bhatnagar, Assistant Chemical Examiner, Punjab, Amritsar, and Dr. Har Gobind Singh Asstt. Chemical Examiner, Punjab Chandigarh, as Court witnesses. After going through the entire evidence led in the case, the learned trial Magistrate accepted the testimony of Sub-Inspector Ohaman Lal P. W. 1, Assistant Sub-Inspector Pyare Lal P. W. 2 and Inspector Sudarshan Singh P. W. 3 and held that the respondent was in fact found to be in possession of illicit opium as alleged by the prosecution, but on the basis of the disparity in the two reports of the Chemical Examiners about the morphine content, he acquitted the respondent. In doing so, he relied upon Satnam Singh v. State 1967 Cur LJ 411 (Punj) in which a similar view had been taken.

(3.) ON behalf of the State of Punjab, the correctness of the view taken by the learned Judge of this Court in Satnam Singh's case 1967 Cur LJ 411 (Punj) (supra) has been challenged. It is submitted that benefit of doubt can be given to an accused person only in that case in which the reports submitted by two Chemical Examiners are discrepant about a substance contained in homogeneous solution and this principle does not apply to the case of mixture, the components of which are not uniformly mixed up.