BALDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal appeal and has been directed against the judgment and order dated 19.1.1996, passed by the court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Amritsar, who convicted the appellant Baldev Singh u/s 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lac; in default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to undergo R.I. for two years.

(2.) BALDEV Singh s/o Ajit Singh s/o Natha Singh r/o Attari, District Amritsar, faced charge in the trial Court on the allegation that on 8.9.1988 in the area of Village Kot Khalsa, District Amritsar, he was allegedly found in possession of 19 Kgs. of Heroin (Smack) by way of 1 packets of heroin, each containing 1 Kg. and thereby he committed an offence punishable u/s 21 of the Act. It may be mentioned here at the first instance that earlier the appellant was charge-sheeted u/s 17 of the Act due to mistake on 19.9.1990 but this charge was later on amended on 9.11.1993 and after the framing of the charge, the appellant pleaded not guilty to the same and claimed a trial.

(3.) ON 8.9.1988, Inspector Sukhdev Singh SHO Police Station Sadar, Amritsar, along with HC Joginder Singh, HC Ajmer Singh, HC Kulwant Singh and other members of the police party were travelling in a vehicle driven by Constable Kashmir Singh. One more police party comprised of Sita Ram, Inspector (Anti Smuggling Staff) along with ASI Kuldip Singh and others were travelling in a govt. jeep driven by Constable Laljit Singh and this police party was being supervised by Tajinderpal Singh, DSP. Both the police parties were proceeding from the side of Kot Khalsa towards the G.T. Road near Khalsa College, after patrolling the area of village Dhapai. When the police vehicles were a little behind the railway crossing, 3 persons were noticed coming and they were carrying trunks on their respective heads. On seeing the police party, they at once took a turn towards the road. On suspicion, they were chased under the directions of the DSP. Out of the 3 persons, one was apprehended by Inspector Sukhdev Singh. He was interrogated. He disclosed his name as Baldev Singh alias Bhiti, s/o Ajit Singh caste Mehra, r/o Attari. He was apprehended along with the trunks. The other two persons accompanying the present appellant were also apprehended. Sita Ram, Inspector, apprehended Puran Singh s/o Teja Singh, caste Mazbhi, r/o Village Bhandial, along with the trunk and out of his possession, 20 packets of Smack (Brown Sugar) were recovered. ASI Atma Singh, one of the members of the police party, apprehended Bakshish Singh s/o Tarlok Singh, caste Mazbhi, r/o Village Kucha Killa, Attari, and from his possession 20 packets of smack were recovered. Sukhdev Singh, Inspector, told the appellant that his personal search was to be conducted and whether he wanted to give his personal search before the DSP. The appellant stated that he has no objection if his person was searched by Inspector Sukhdev Singh. Thereafter, in the presence of the witnesses, the Inspector took the search of the person of the appellant as well as of the trunk, which was being carried by the appellant. From the personal search of the appellant, a key was found from the right pocket of the pant and with the help of that key, the lock of the trunk was opened. 19 packets of smack (Brown Sugar) were recovered from that trunk. Those packets were wrapped in glazed papers and were stitched with clothes. Before that, those packets were weighed. Each packet weighed 1 Kg. In this manner, Smack weighing 19 kg was recovered. Inspector separated 10 gm. of smack from each of the packets for the purpose of sample and sealed the same with his own seal bearing inscription "SS". The remaining bulk of packets were separately sealed. The key was also taken into possession separately. Appellant could not produce any licence or permit for the possession of the smack. Resultantly, Ruqa was sent to the police station for the registration of the case u/ss. 17/18 of the Act, on the basis of which formal FIR 374 was recorded against the present appellant as well as his companions. The I.O. also prepared the rough site plan of the place of recovery. He recorded the statements of the witnesses and on return to the police station, he deposited the case property with the Maharrir Head Constable with seals intact. Ultimately, the sample of Brown Sugar was sent to the office of the chemical examiner, who vide report, Ex. PE, declared the presence of Diacetyl Morphine, which was an active ingredient of smack. The percentage of Diacetyl Morphine in each packet was mentioned in the report itself starting from 4.20% to 4.40%. On the completion of the investigation of the case, the appellant was challaned in the court of the Illaqa Magistrate, who supplied the copies of the documents to the appellant free of cost as required under the law and vide commitment order dated 28.8.1990, committed the appellant to the court of Sessions to face trial u/ss 17/18 of the Act. As I have stated earlier, the appellant was charge-sheeted u/s 17 of the Act on 19.9.1990. This mistake was later on rectified by the trial court on 9.11.1993 and the appellant was charge-sheeted u/s 21 of the Act. The charge was read over and explained to the appellant, who pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial.