HOSHIAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Hoshiar Singh son of Balbir Singh resident of village Kathura has filed the present appeal and it has been directed against the judgment dated 3.8.1996 and order dated 5.8.1996, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, who convicted the appellant under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (herein after called '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, appellant was directed to undergo R.I. for one year.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 18.1.1995 ASI Maman Singh along with other police officials namely Omkar Singh, Chhota Lal and Chander Singh was present on bus stand Behal. Meanwhile, HC Mahender Pal came there along with Const. Satpal Singh, Ganga Ram independent witness. They were also associated in the police party and when it reached T-Point, Behal to Rampura Beri on Rajgarh Road, it noticed the appellant coming from the side of village Rampura Beri carrying a gunny bag on his shoulder. On seeing the police on the basis of suspicion. Notice Ex.PA was served upon the appellant by ASI Maman Singh, who made enquiry from the appellant whether he wanted to give the search of the bag in the presence of some Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. The appellant reposed confidence in the police party and in the Thanedar and to that effect he also made a statement Ex.PB which was read over and explained to him. Thereafter search of the-bag was taken in the presence of police party and independent witness Ganga Ram and poppy husk was recovered. On weighment it came to 10 Kgs. The Thanedar separated 100 grams of poppy husk by way of sample and made a sealed parcel thereof. The remaining poppy husk was sealed in a separate parcel. Both the parcels were sealed with the seal bearing inscription 'MP' by the Investigating Officer and it was taken into police possession vide recovery memo Ex.PC. The seal after use was handed over to HC Mahender Pal. The appellant could not produce any licence or permit. Resultantly, ruqa Ex. PD was sent to the police station on the basis of which formal F.I.R. Ex. PD/1 was recorded. The grounds of arrest Ex.PE were also scribed by the Thanedar, who further prepared rough site plain Ex.PF of the place of recovery. The Thanedar also complied the provisions of Section 57 of the Act when he re-produced the case property before SI Mahender Singh, who re-sealed the case property with his own seal bearing inscription 'MS'. The sample of the poppy husk was sent to the office of Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, who vide report Ex.PY declared the contents as poppy straw. On completion of the investigation of the case, appellant was challaned under Section 15 of the Act in the Court of Area Magistrate, who supplied the copies of the documents to the appellant and vide commitment order dated 20.9.1995 committed the appellant to the Court of Session.

(3.) Vide order dated 20.10.1995 appellant was charge sheeted under Section 15 of the Act. The charge was read over and explained to him to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial.