TITU SINGH Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3.7.2000 rendered by the learned Special Judge, Solan whereby the appellant/accused (hereafter referred to as the accused) has been convicted under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act1) and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twelve years and to pay fine of rupees one lac and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years.

(2.) The case against the accused is that on 23.11.1999, ASI Chaman Lai (PW -8) along with some other police officials including HC Ranjit Singh (PW -3) and Constable Amarjit Singh (PW -4) was on patrol duty at Industrial Area Baddi. When they reached near Winson Factory, PW -8 received secret information against the accused as to his habitual involvement in the commission of offences concerning narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. PW -8 recorded the information and reasons for believing it to be correct vide Ext. PN, one copy each whereof was sent through PW -4 to the Station House Officer, Police Station, Barotiwala, namely, Vijay Kumar (PW -9) and Superintendent of Police, Solan. Thereafter PW -8 associated two independent witnesses, namely, Joginder Singh (PW -1) and Mela Ram (DW -1) and conducted the search of the premises known as Himachal Stationery Factory Plot No. 64, Industrial Area, Baddi. At the time of search, the accused was found present in one of the rooms. The reasons for search were disclosed to him by PW -8 who also gave option to the accused whether he desired to be searched by him (PW -8) or before some Magistrate or Gazetted Officer. The accused consented to be searched by PW -8 vide memo Ext. PE. Thereafter the police officials and the witnesses joined to witness the search, gave their search vide memos. Exts. PB and PC. The search of the premises occupied by the accused was then taken and one attache -case kept under the cot of the accused was noticed and was opened and Charas: weighing 1.4 kgs. Was found therein kept in a Polythene pouch Ext. P -3. Out of the Charas so found, two samples of 10 Gms. each were separated for chemical analysis and thereafter the bulk of the Charas and the two samples were separately sealed with seal T vide memo. Ext. PF. Seal T" used for sealing the case property, after taking the sample thereof, was handed over to Mela Ram (DW -1) vide memo. Ext. PH. PW -8 drew up Rooka1 Ext. PL and sent the same through PW -3 to the Police Station where formal FIR ext. PM was recorded. On receipt of Rooka Ext. PL, .SHO Vijay Kumar (PW -9) proceeded to the spot. On arrival of PW -9 on the spot, PW -8 handed over the case property and the other memos. Already prepared by him to PW -9 who re -parceled the case property and samples and sealed the same with seal A vide memo. Ext. PG. After taking the sample, seal A was handed over to Mela Ram (DW -1) vide memo. Ext. PK. Other legal formalities like preparation of the site plan Ext. PQ, disclosure of ground of arrest to the accused and submission of the report under Section 57 of the Act followed. One of the samples of the seizure Charas was sent to the Chemical Laboratory at Kandaghat and on analysis of the sample; the contents thereof were found to be charas vide report Ext. PR. On being satisfied of involvement of the accused in the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Act, the Officer Incharge, Police Station Barotiwala submitted a charge -sheet against the accused who came to be tried on a charge under Section 20 of the Act.

(3.) To prove the charge against the accused, the prosecution examined 9 witnesses. Statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal procedure was recorded wherein he denied the prosecution case as a whole and claimed that he was apprehended by the police on 22.11.1999 and was taken to Police Station Barotiwala and on the next day, i.e. 23.11.1999, a false case was foisted on him whereas he was never found in possession of the charas. The accused led defence and examined one of the search witnesses, namely, Mela Ram (DW -1) in his defence.