DUD NATH Vs. STATE OF UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment/order dated 19-12-1995, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, whereby the appellant has been convicted under S. 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years.

(2.) The facts leading to this appeal are that on 1-1-1994, A.S.I. Rajinder Pal of C.I.A. Chandigarh, along with his associates held a nakabandi near tubewell of Sector 25. Per chance one Banwari Lal son of Raghu Nath met him with whom he was talking. In the meanwhile, at about 11.30 a.m. the appellant having a bag in his right hand was sighted coming on foot from the side of the University. On seeing the police party, he tried to retreat. Suspicion having arisen, he was apprehended. ASI Rajinder Pal asked the appellant to give his search but he refused to do so and said that he would offer his search before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. On a wireless message, DSP Devinder Singh reached the spot and disclosed his identity to the appellant. On a direction given by the said D.S.P., ASI Rajinder Pal conducted the search of the bag of the appellant which was found to contain charas weighing 1 kg. 200 gms. A sample weighing 100 gms. was separated. The sample charas and the remaining charas were converted into two separate parcels with the seal of 'RP'. Sample seal was prepared and the seal after use was handed over to Banwari Lal. Ruqa-Exhibit PB was sent to the Police Station, on the basis of which a case under S. 20 of the Act was registered against the appellant/vide F.I.R., copy of which is Exhibit PB/1. Sealed sample parcel was sent to the office of Forensic Science Laboratory. On the receipt of the report of the Chemical Examiner and after completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed in the Court.

(3.) A charge under S. 20 of the Act was framed against the appellant, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.