STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SANJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed by the State against judgment dated 6.4.2009 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, Mandi in Sessions Trial No. 2 of 2006, vide which the learned Trial Court has acquitted the accused for the commission of offence under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (in short the 'Act').

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, was that on 4.3.2005 HC Ram Lal, CIA staff Mandi, accompanied by Constables Sant Ram, Tara Chand and Vidya Sagar and Bhagmal Constable of Security Branch, Mandi were present, near under construction power bridge at Larji. A person came from Larji side and on noticing police, he took out a poly bag from the pocket of his jacket and threw the same towards Beas River. However, the poly bag fell on the bridge and he fled towards Larji. He was chased and apprehended. The poly bag which was carried out by him was checked in the presence of witnesses Jagdish Kumar and Tara Chand. From the said bag, charas was recovered and on weighing, it was found to be 1Kg. Out of the recovered charas, two samples of 25 grams each were separated and sealed with six seals of 'T' and bulk charas was sealed in a separate parcel with six seals of 'T'. NCB form in triplicate was prepared and specimen seal impression was drawn and seal after use was handed over to Jagdish Kumar. The case property was taken into possession as per memo Ext. PJ and Rukka Ext. PC was prepared and forwarded to the Police Station through Tara Chand Constable for recording the FIR. Accused was arrested as per memo Ext. PK and search memo of his personal search Ext. PL was prepared. The case property and accused were handed over by Ram Lal HC to SHO Dabe Ram, who resealed the case property with five seal impression of H. The case property was thereafter deposited with Raj Kumar MHC and special report Ext. PE was sent by HC, Balak Ram, through Constable Chandermani to Addl. Superintendent of Police, Mandi. The sample on analysis was found to be that of charas by the chemical analyzer as per his report Ext. PJ. Investigation was carried out and thereafter challan was filed in the Court and the accused was charged for the commission of offence punishable under Section 20 of the Act.

(3.) In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution, in all, examined ten witnesses.