LAWS(P&H)-2007-10-4

SAFFI ULLAH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On October 10, 2007
SAFFI ULLAH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT Saffi Ullah, convicted for an offence under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances Act, 1985 (for short, "the Act"), has filed this appeal. He was prosecuted and tried for recovery of 3 Kgs. of opium, which he was allegedly carrying in a Jhola (bag ). Recovery was effected on the basis of secret information, which ASI Narain Singh PW2 received on 21. 8. 1996. At that time, PW2 was on patrolling duty in the vicinity near the school at Village Jaullian, when he received this secret information. The information was to the effect that Saffi Ullah is an opium smuggler who has come from Uttar pradesh and was proceeding towards village Kalian. PW2 sent a ruqa and request for DSP Gurmeet Singh to reach the spot. One Mehal Singh was joined as an independent witness. When the party reached near cremation ground of Village Jaullian, appellant Saffi Ullah was seen coming on a cycle. At that time, he was carrying a bag on the cycle. DSP Gurmeet Singh also reached in the meanwhile. PW2 apprised the appellant that he was to be searched and gave him an option if he wanted to be searched before a gazetted Officer, who was present. The appellant agreed to be searched in the presence of DSP and his statement, Ex. PB, was recorded to this effect. The statement was thumb marked by the appellant. This memo was statedly attested by DSP Gurmeet singh, ASI Pritam Singh and independent witness Mehal Singh. On a search of the bag by PW2, opium wrapped in a glazed paper was recovered. Two samples, each weighing 10 grams, were taken out and separated. Remaining opium was weighed and found to be 3 Kgs. 480 grams. The samples as well as the opium, which was recovered were put in separate parcels and sealed with the seal bearing impression 'gs' of DSP Gurmeet singh. The case property along with cycle was taken into possession and deposited with the MHC. The samples were sent for analysis to the Chemical Examiner. On completion of investigation, the appellant was put to trial.

(2.) WHEN confronted with the incriminating facts and circumstances and the evidence appearing against him, the appellant stated that he was innocent besides pleading his false implication. He also examined mehal Singh as a defence witness in support of his case.

(3.) THE case of the prosecution is supported by the evidence given by DSP gurmeet Singh PW1, ASI Narain Singh pw2 and some formal witnesses. The report of the Chemical Examiner was also exhibited on record and taken into consideration in support of the prosecution case. The court found the appellant guilty and sentenced him to suffer 10 years RI coupled with fine of Rs. one lac. This happened on 7/3/1998. This appeal was filed by the appellant in the year 1998. The same could not be heard for considerable time whereas the appellant continued to undergo the sentence awarded to him. On 19/11/2004, sentence awarded to the appellant was suspended by this Court, as the appeal of the appellant could not be heard. It is thus, seen that the appellant, by now, has undergone 8 years and 3 months of the actual sentence out, of 10 years RI awarded to him.