STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. DARSHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is preferred by the appellant/State under Sec. 378 of the Code Criminal Procedure assailing the judgment of acquittal, dated 31.5.2011, passed by the learned Special Judge, Fast Track Court, Chamba, District Chamba,H.P., in Sessions Trial No.11 of 2011, whereby the accused was acquitted of the charges framed against him under Sec. 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act,1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'').

(2.) Briefly stating, as per prosecution story, facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 26.2.2011, at about 1.00 p.m., a secret information was received by ASI, Jeet Singh that the accused deals in smuggling of Charas and has gone towards Chamba side for bringing Charas and if nakka is laid at Bonkhari mor (curve), the accused can be nabbed with Charas. To this effect, a daily diary report Ex.PW-6/A, was entered and sent to the Superintendent of Police, Chamba, through Constable, Subhash Chand No.572. After sending information, Investigating Officer/ASI, Jeet Singh took out I.O. kit and proceeded to the spot along with Constable, Anuj Kumar and Home Guard, Palwinder. The witnesses Vijay Kumar and Surinder were found standing at Toll Tax Barrier, where they were waiting for bus. He apprised Vijay and Surinder about the secret information of possession of Charas by the accused and whether or not they were ready to accompany him to Bonkhari mor. Thereafter, they both agreed to accompany him to Bonkhari mor and, as such, they were made to sit in the vehicle (Alto Car) No.HP-20D-0997, belonging to the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer, along with these witnesses and Constable, Anuj Kumar and Home Guard, Palwinder reached at Bonkhri mor at about 1.45 p.m. and laid a nakka there and started waiting for the accused by concealing their presence below the road. It has been averred that at about 3.00 pm, as per the description given by the secret source, the accused having same description, was seen coming on Chakra road, who was stopped by the Investigating Officer, who disclosed his name, as Darshan Lal son of Prithi, resident of near Kali Mata Mandir, Pathankot. The accused was intimated that he was being suspected of carrying Charas and his personal search was required to be taken. He was also apprised of his legal right to be searched before some Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, in writing, but the accused agreed to be searched by the police at spot, per memo Ex.PW-2/A. Thereafter, all the police officials and witnesses Vijay and Surinder gave their search to the accused, per memo. Ex.PW-1/A. Thereafter, personal search, of the accused was taken and during search, a polythene packet was recovered from him, which had been concealed by the accused below the belt of his trouser on the front side. The word 'Sahajada garments' was printed on the said polythene packet and on opening it, one more packet of Khakhi colour was recovered, containing black coloured hard substance in the shape of candles and balls, which, on smell and experience, was found to be Charas. Thereafter, the Charas was weighed, which was found 1kg.540 grams, with polythene packet. The Charas, so recovered, was put in the Khakhi colour packet, which in turn, was put in the packet of 'Sahajada garments' and then the same was parceled and sealed in a piece of cloth by affixing three seals of impression 'K'. Sample seal Ex.PW-1/B, was taken separately. NCB forms Ex.PW-10/F were completed in triplicate and seal was embossed thereon and the seal was handed over to witness Surinder and thereafter the case property was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW-1/C. Thereafter, rukka Ex.PW-13/A (mark B) was written and sent to the Police Station, through Constable, Anuj Kumar for registration of the case on the basis of which F.I.R. Ex.PW-10/A was registered. On the spot inspection, map Ex.PW-13/B was prepared. The accused was arrested and communicated about the grounds of his arrest, vide memo Ex.PW-1/D and his personal search was taken per memo Ex.PW-1/E. Thereafter, statements of the witnesses were recorded, as per their versions. Thereafter, the accused, case file and the case property brought to the Police Station for resealing the same and produced to the S.I. Vishwas Kumar, Additional S.H.O., who also resealed the parcel in the presence of Constable Hem Raj by affixing two seals of seal impression 'T' and also took sample seal of 'T' on Ex.PW-1/B and embossed two seals of 'T' in NCB forms and filled relevant columns of NCB forms Ex.PW-10/F and prepared reseal memo Ex.PW-7/A and, thereafter, handed over the case file to the Investigating Officer and deposited the case property i.e. parcel NCB forms, sample seals with MHC and the accused was taken into custody. MHC entered the case property in the Malkhana register, vide Ex.PW-10/B. Special report of the case, Ex.PW-3/B, was prepared and sent to the Superintendent of Police, through Constable, Anil Kumar, who deposited the same with Head Constable Subhash Chand, Reader to the Superintendent of Police at about 3.45 p.m., which was produced before the Superintendent of Police, Chamba at 3.50 p.m. On 27.2.2011, at about 1.00 p.m., MHC, Indu Balla entrusted the aforesaid parcel, sample seals, NCB forms and copy of seizure memo and copy of FIR along with document to Constable, Suresh Kumar No.338, vide R.C. No.22/11, Ex.PW-10/C for being deposited in F.S.L., which he deposited in F.S.L. on 28.2.2011 and handed over the receipt to her. Daily diary report No.26-A, Ex.PW-10/D and daily diary report No.27-A, dated 26.2.2011, Ex. PW- 10/E, were procured. Statements of witnesses were also recorded. The report of Chemical Analyst, F.S.L., Junga Ex.PX was received that the quantity of resin found in the Charas was 28.88% w/w and the same were extract of cannabis and sample of Charas.

(3.) A copy of the challan and other documents were supplied to the accused. On consideration, the accused was charged for the commission of offence under Sec. 20 of the NDPS Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. To prove its case, the prosecution examined, as many as, thirteen witnesses, in order to substantiate the charge against the accused.