SULINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANTS are aggrieved by the judgment of the trial Court whereby they have been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default of payment to fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two years.

(2.) FIRST , the allegations on which the appellants were tried and convicted may be noticed. On 7.7.2003 when a Police party, headed by PW-15 ASI Harbans Lal, was present at Gondpur, PW-12 Constable Upnesh Kumar met it and informed ASI Harbans Lal that the appellants had kept huge quantity of poppy straw concealed in their house in village Gondpur Bulla and if raid was conducted immediately Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? the same could be recovered. The aforesaid information was reduced into writing, in the form of statement, under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for the formal registration of the case and also to meet the requirement of Section 42(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Thereafter, a raiding party was formed and on the search of the house of the appellants eight bags, seven containing 45 kgs. each and one containing 35 kgs. poppy husk, were recovered. Two samples, each weighing 250 grams, from each of the bags, were separated and sealed. The appellants were arrested. One sample from each of the eight bags was sent to the Chemical Examiner, who opined that the samples contained contents of poppy husk.

(3.) IN another case, i.e., Criminal Appeal No.295 of 2004, titled as Rajiv Kumar alias Guglu versus State of H.P., we noticed that the report of the Chemical Examiner showed that two tests were conducted in respect of the sample of poppy straw to ascertain whether meconic acid and morphine were present in the sample stuff and on finding both the tests positive, opinion was given that the sample contained contents of poppy straw. We felt that the tests perhaps were not enough to reach the conclusion that the stuff was, in fact, poppy ...3... straw. Therefore, we ordered that the Chemical Examiner be summoned and examined, as a Court witness. Pursuant to our orders, the Chemical Examiner appeared in that case. His statement was recorded, a copy whereof has been placed on the record of this case.