MEWA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal arises out of a judgment dated 31.1.1994 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, in Sessions Case No. 23 of 21.10.1992, recording conviction of accused-appellant Mewa Singh under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the Act'), and sentencing him to undergo RI for ten years with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to undergo further RI for a period of two years.

(2.) IT appears that on 8.1.2.1991, SI Hitender Singh Ghai (PW5) along with his policy party consisting of HC Inderjit Singh (PW), Constable Harjit Singh (not examined) and other police officials, was present in the area of village Mehas on a canal bridge in connection with police patrol duty. He received a secret information that accused appellant Mewa Singh son of Sampuran Singh is engaged in selling poppy husk and if raided, that contraband item could be recovered from his possession. A ruqa (Ex.PF) was sent to police station through C. Harjit Singh, for registration of FIR. Accordingly, FIR (Ex.PF/1) was recorded by ASI Rame Shah (not examined). Thereafter, SI Hitender Singh Ghai (PW5) with police party set out for the place of recovery, however, on the way, as he met Kaka Singh, a public witness (PW4), near the turning of village Rohti Mouran, he also associated him. When the police party reached the canal bridge of Rohti Chhana, the accused was spotted coming from the direction of village Bhojomajri. As the accused was known to public witness Kaka Singh from before, on his pointing out, he was arrested and later interrogated. During the course of interrogation, accused Mewa Singh made a disclosure statement that he had concealed 30 bags of poppy husk under a kikar tree near village Rohti in some ditches and could get the same recovered. Statement of the accused was reduced into writing vide Ex.PA, whereon, he also affixed his thumb impressions. His statement was attested by public witness Kaka Singh (PW4) and HC Inderjit Singh (PW1). It appears that accused appellant Mewa Singh was also given an offer in terms of Section 50 of the Act, as to whether he wanted to be searched in presence of a Magistrate or before a Gazetted officer and he gave his consent to be searched by Police Sub Inspector Hitender Singh Ghai (PW5) himself. Thereafter, the accused appellant led the police party to the spot where he had concealed the contraband item, 30 bags of poppy husk, and got the same recovered. On weighment, each bag was found to contain 35 Kgs. of poppy husk. Thereafter, one sample of 250 grams from each bag was drawn and all the 30 samples were made into separate parcels. The residue quantity of poppy husk was put it to the same gunny bags. All the sample parcels and gunny bags were sealed on the spot with the seal of SI Hitender Singh Ghai (PW5) with seal impression "HSG". Case properties relating to search and seizure were taken into possession vide recovery memo (Ex.PB) which was attested again by the sane set of witnesses, namely, HC Inderjit Singh (PW1) and public witness Kaka Singh (PW4). The seal of police Inspector Hitender Singh Ghai (FW5) was handed over to public witness Kaka Singh (PW4). Investigating Officer Hitender Singh Ghai (PW5) also prepared a rough site plan (Ex.PD) with correct marginal notes and recorded the statements of prosecution witnesses on the spot. He took the accused person in custody and having returned to police station, deposited the case properties with seals intact with Moharir Head Constable Jai Gopal (PW2) and the accused was lodged in police lock up. The samples were later sent to Chemical Examiner's office for testing and on receiving a report (Ex.PH), and having completed the investigation, accused appellant Mewa Singh was challaned and sent up for trial. On the case being committed, he was tried upon by learned Special Judge who held him guilty of the offence charged with.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab submitted that this is a case of a huge recovery of contraband item weighing 1050 Kgs. of poppy husk. The accused appellant was found in the conscious possession of said contraband, pursuant to a secret information received by the police and recorded vide the ruqa and FIR. Further, the recovery was effected only pursuant to the disclosure statement given by accused appellant Mewa Singh. Learned counsel also submitted that though there was a delay in sending the samples to the Chemical Examiner, but the seals were found to be intact and there was no complaint of tampering with. This is a further submission on behalf of the State that public witness Kaka Singh (PW4) has supported the prosecution case in part and he has no where stated that he did not know the accused from before. Besides, this was also submitted that the provisions of Section 57 of the Act are only directory in nature and their non-compliance did not cause a serious prejudice to the accused appellant. Similarly, taking of only one sample each from 30 bags has also not caused any prejudice to the rights of the accused. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the appeal record.