STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. PINKU RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment, dated 1.6.2004, delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Solan, H.P., whereby he acquitted the accused of having committed an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, hereinafter referred to as the Act.

(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that on 17th August, 2002, at about 8.15 p.m., PW-7 Shamsher Singh alongwith H.C. Sewa Singh, PW-2 Constable Subhash Chand and PW-3 Constable Yash Pal and independent witnesses PW-8 Raja Ram and Kulbir Dhiman were present near Railway Crossing, Sector-2, Parwanoo. At that time, one person came form Parwanoo side. On noticing the police officials, he tried to run away. This aroused the suspicion of the police officials, who apprehended the said person, who disclosed his name to be Pinku (the accused). This person was carrying a polythene bag in his hand. Search of the bag was done in the presence of the independent witnesses and from this bag, ganja was recovered. PW-3 Yash Pal was sent to bring the scales and weights and thereafter the ganja was weighed, which was found to be 150 grams. Two samples of 25 grams each were drawn. THEreafter, these two samples as well as the remaining bulk ganja were sealed in three different parcels with seal `K'. THE case property was taken into possession vide memo Ext.PC. THEreafter, ruka Ext.PD was prepared and sent through PW-2 Constable Subhash Chand, which resulted in lodging the FIR Ext.PE. THEreafter, PW-9 SI/SHO Avtar Chand came to the spot and recorded the statements of the witnesses. THE case property was also handed over to him at the spot. THE case property was deposited by PW-9 Avtar Chand with PW-4 MHC Ram Lal, who, in turn, sent one of the samples through PW-5 H.C. Rajinder Singh to CTL, Kandaghat. Chemical Analyst vide his report Ext.PP opined that the sample was of ganja.

(3.) THE main grounds which weighed with the learned trial Court for acquitting the accused were ? i) that there was non-compliance of Section 50 of the Act; ii) that Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. had not been complied with and; iii) that since the independent witness has turned hostile and the stand of the official witnesses was not consistent, the benefit had to be given to the accused.