PARDEEP Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 20.8.2018 and order dated 21.8.2018 rendered by learned Judge, Special Court (Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985), Hisar in NDPS Act Case No. 20 of 2017, whereby accused Pardeep was charged with and tried for the offence punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the NDPS Act'). He was convicted and sentenced thereunder to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 12 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for two years.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that on 2.9.2017 ASI Zora Singh along with EASI Darbara Singh and EHC Ranjeet was on patrolling duty. They noticed a Tavera car bearing registration no. PB11BK-9065 coming from Hansi side. ASI Zora Singh signaled to stop that vehicle. He ascertained the antecedents of the driver of the vehicle. The driver disclosed his name as Pardeep. The accused was issued notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act and he was told that his vehicle could be searched by some gazetted officer. He reposed faith in ASI Zora Singh. Thereafter, they searched the vehicle and found a plastic bag lying behind the driver seat. It contained Codeine Phosphate O Trip Rolidine, Hydrochioride syrup 100 ML, 90 in number and Winpas Codeine Phosphate Triprocidine, Hydrochioride, Syrup Win Cerex 100 ML 70 in number. The accused could not produce any license or bill for carrying these drugs. Two bottles from each type of bottles were taken out and samples were drawn from each bottle. Remaining bottles were put in the bag. The samples as well as the bag were converted into separate sealed parcels. The site plan was prepared. The investigation was completed and the challan was put up after the completion of all the codal formalities.

(3.) The prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses in support of its case. The statement of the accused was also recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the case of the prosecution. According to him, he was falsely implicated in the case. He was convicted and sentenced, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, the present appeal.