STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RANJEET RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State challenges the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu on 4.3.2002 acquitting the respondent for offences under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The prosecution case in brief is that Head Constable PW10 Lal Singh, Constable Bachitter Singh, L.H.C. PW7 Surat Ram, Constable PW8 Santosh Kumar and Lady Constable Ram Kali were checking traffic at Bajaura barrier, Kullu. At around 6.10 p.m., bus of Monal Travels having registration No.HP-01/1709 travelling from Manali to Delhi was stopped for checking at Bajaura barrier. The case is that the accused at that time was occupying seat No. 31 for which he had purchased ticket Ext.PW4/A. He was found in possession of a bag which according to the prosecution he had kept between his legs. This bag was seized and searched and 3 Kilograms charas was found. Three samples of 10 grams each were separated and packed in three empty match boxes which were wrapped and sealed separately with seal 'T' which was entrusted to PW7 Surat Ram. N.C.B. Form Ext. PW10/A was prepared in triplicate. These proceedings were conducted in the presence of PW9 Raj Kumar conductor of the bus.

(2.) On the evidence as led by the prosecution, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent holding that case of conscious possession was not established and that the prosecution evidence was full of contradictions. Learned Sessions Judge held that PW9 Raj Kumar, who was an independent witness, has not supported the case with respect to the possession of the contraband by the accused/respondent.

(3.) The State now appeals against this judgment. Learned Senior Additional Advocate General urges that the judgment of the learned trial Court is conjectural and that the evidence of L.H.C. PW7 Surat Ram, Constable PW8 Santosh Kumar and H.C. PW10 Lal Singh corroborated each other in all material particulars so far as recovery is concerned and in these circumstances, the evidence of PW9 Raj Kumar Conductor of the bus could not be accepted on his face value, to discredit their testimony.