TEJ RAM Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 10.4.2015, rendered by the learned Special Judge, Chamba, H.P, in Sessions Trial No. 3 of 2013 (44/13), whereby the appellant -accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused), who was charged with and tried for offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ND & PS Act), has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he was further ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that on 23.12.2012, at 6:30 AM, ASI Rajinder Kumar, I.O Police Post Sultanpur, alongwith HC Raghubir Singh, Const. Dalip Kumar and HHG Harsh Jasrotia and I.O. kit was present at Bataluan Mor near Hanuman Mandir in connection with Nakabandi. In the meantime, Sanjeev Kumar son of Taru Ram, resident of Mangla and Harish Chander son of Tara Chand resident of Obri, Chamba also came there. One person was noticed coming from Sultanpur side who was on his way towards Mangla side. On noticing the police party, he turned back and started running. The person was holding a bag in his right hand, which raised suspicion in the mind of ASI Rajinder Kumar. He suspected that the person might be carrying some contraband or narcotic drugs. The person was nabbed by the police party at a distance of 40 meters alongwith the bag. The person disclosed his name as Tej Ram. ASI Rajinder Kumar in the presence of witnesses Sanjeev Kumar and Harish Chander told accused that his bag was to be searched and that he has a legal right to be searched in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. Accused told that he is illiterate and only knows how to sign. He told the police that he wanted to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer. The Addl. S.P., Chamba, Kulwant Singh was informed and requested to visit the spot. A consent memo was prepared in this regard. The police officials including the witnesses gave their personal search to the accused and on the direction of Addl. S.P., the bag of the accused was checked which was found to be containing carry bag having black substance in it. It was weighed. It weighed 1 kg 150 grams. Thereafter, the recovered contraband was put in the same carry bag and the other bag in the same manner as it was recovered which was packed in a cloth parcel and sealed with six seals of impression "T". NCB forms in triplicate were filled in. Specimen of seal "T" were retained on a separate cloth piece. The seal "T" after its use was handed over to witness Harish Chander. The charas was taken into possession. Rukka was prepared and sent to the Police Station through Const. Dalip Kumar for registration of a case against the accused. FIR was got registered. The case property was produced before ASI Bishambhar Singh for resealing. ASI Bhishambhar Singh resealed the parcel with seal impression "S" and prepared reseal memo. He deposited the case property with MHC Pawan Kumar. The case property was sent to FSL Junga. The investigation was completed and the challan was put up in the Court after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) MR . Vinay Thakur, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the accused, has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. On the other hand, Mr. P.M. Negi, Dy. AG, for the State has supported the judgment of the learned trial Court dated 10.4.2015.