JUGAL KISHORE Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is instituted against judgment and order dtd. 19/8/2016 rendered by Special Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, in Sessions Case No. 62 of 2015 whereby the appellant, who was charged with and tried for offence punishable under Sec. 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short 'NDPS Act'), has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 12 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1.00 lac and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years, for offence punishable under Sec. 18(b) of the NDPS Act.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 24/12/2014 Inspector Om Parkash, Incharge, Narcotic Cell, Sri Muktsar Sahib, along with other police officials, reached near Dera Radha Swami. One Balwant Singh son of Mukhtiar Singh met the police party. When the police party reached near bus stand of village Barkandi, then accused carrying a black colour bag on his right shoulder was seen standing. He got perplexed. He immediately entered into the bus stop. He was apprehended. He disclosed his identity. Accused was apprised about his legal right of search in the presence of a Magistrate or a gazetted officer. Accused shown his willingness to be searched in the presence of a gazetted officer. Thereafter DSP Kanwalpreet Singh Chahal was called. He also apprised about his legal right of search. Accused reposed faith in him. Consent memo was prepared. Bag was searched. The bag contained opium. It was weighed on computer scale. 10 grams was separated as sample. Remaining bulk weighing 3.490 kgs. was converted into bulk parcel. Form M29 was filled on the spot. Case property was taken into possession. Case property was produced before the SHO SI Iqbal Singh. He verified the facts. He put his seal. The case property was sent for chemical examination. Challan was put up after receipt of chemical examiner's report and completion of all the codal formalities.

(3.) The prosecution examined a number of witnesses in support of its case. Statement of accused was recorded under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the case of prosecution. The accused also examined two witnesses in his defence. The appellant was convicted and sentenced, as noticed hereinabove. Hence the appeal.