STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SURENDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ASSAILING the judgment dated 22.05.2009, passed by Special Judge, Bilaspur, H.P., in N.D.P.S. Case No. 2 of 2006, titled as State Versus Surender Kumar, State has filed the present appeal under the provisions of Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2.) IT is the case of prosecution that on 03.02.2005, Inspector Manoj Kumar (PW.9) alongwith Head Constable Jag Pal, Constable Jagat Pal, Shyam Lal, Raj Kumar (PW.1), Sanjiv Kumar (PW.7) and Parkash Chand, was on patrol duty. At about 3.15 P.M. near Chharol, seeing the police party, accused got perplexed and tried to flee away. Same time, independent witnesses Surender Pal (PW.5) and Jai Pal (PW.6) reached the spot in a vehicle. Accused was apprehended and independent witnesses Yusuf Khan (PW.4), Surender Pal and Jai Pal were associated for carrying out the search and seizure operations. Accused gave his consent vide memo (Ex.PW.7/A) and in the presence of independent witnesses was searched. He was carrying a packet hidden under his armpit, from which opium was recovered. Upon weighment, it was found to be 450 grams. Two samples of 25 grams each were drawn and sealed with a seal of seal impression 'J'. They were marked as A -1 and A -2. Remaining bulk parcel was sealed with the very same seal and taken into possession vide memo (Ex.PW.7/D). NCB forms in triplicate were filled up. Special report (Ex.PW.2/A) was sent to the superior Officer. Rukka (Ex.PW.9/B) was sent through Constable Raj Kumar (PW.1) on the basis of which FIR No. 61/05 dated 03.02.2005 (Ex.PW.10/A) was registered at Police Station, Sadar, Bilaspur, H.P., under the provisions of Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as NDPS Act), against the accused. Accused was arrested on the spot. Contraband substance was deposited with MHC Lalit Kumar (PW.11), who sent the sample for chemical analysis to the CTL, Kandaghat, through Constable Raj Kumar vide Road Certificate (Ex.PW.1/A). Reports of the Chemical Analyst (Ex.P -A and P -B) were taken on record. With the completion of investigation, which prima facie revealed complicity of the accused in the alleged crime, Challan was presented in the Court for trial.

(3.) IN order to establish its case, in all, prosecution examined as many as eleven witnesses. Statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was also recorded, in which he took plea of innocence and false implication. No evidence in defence was led.