Delhi District Court
State vs Noor Mohd. @ Babloo And Ors on 25 April, 2026
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 1 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS. FIR No. 270/2022 (Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS), SHAHDARA, KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS. FIR No. 270/2022 (Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act In the matter of :- State .....(through Ld. Addl. PP) Vs. (1) Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, S/o Md. Samsuddin, R/o Village Patrahi Khurd, P.S. Bheldi, P.O. Apahar, District Saran, Bihar. (2) Ujjwal Kumar, S/o Sh. Nagender Pandey, R/o Village Kharida, P.S. Bheldi, District Saran, Bihar. (3) Laxmi Singh, S/o Late Bijoy Singh, R/o Village Morakordoiguri Kachari Gaon, Sariahjan, District Karbi, DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 2 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS. FIR No. 270/2022 (Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Anglong, Assam. .....accused no.1, 2 & 3 (represented by Sh. Nadeem Khan, Advocate) (4) Azad @ Rakal, S/o Md. Jalal, R/o D-124, New Seemapuri, Delhi. .....accused (represented by Sh. Deepak Ghai, Advocate) (5) Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey, S/o Sh. Ramanandan Pandey, R/o Ram Vihar, Chhapraula, P.S. Badalpur, District Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. ....accused (represented by Sh. I.P. Saini, Advocate) (6) Rajender Kumar Nayak, S/o Sh. Netranand Nayak, R/o Village Bakisahi, Pandripoda, P.S. Polasara Ganjam, Odisha. .....accused (represented by Sh. Yuvraj Singh, Advocate) Date of institution : 17.05.2023 Date when Judgment reserved : 17.03.2026 Date of Judgment : 25.04.2026 Final Decision : Acquitted DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 3 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS. FIR No. 270/2022 (Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act JUDGMENT
CASE OF THE PROSECUTION
1. Brief facts of the present case as per charge-sheet are that on 19.11.2022, on the orders of Inspector Ashish Dahima, a team was formed under the leadership of ASI Rambir Singh alongwith HC Rajeev, HC Prince, HC Mohit and W/HC Pooja to collect information regarding persons involved in buying and selling of illegal drugs and he alongwith the team took IO bag, electronic weighing machine, laptop, UPS & Portable Printer and went in a Private ECO Sports car bearing no. DL 12 CB 3654. Vide GD No. 133A recorded at 20:12:23 dated 19.11.2022 they left for Shahdara District, Delhi. At around 9:30 pm when he alongwith other staff members was present near Red Cross Hospital, Dilshad Garden, a secret informer met him who told that two persons namely Noor Mohmmad and Ujjwal Kumar alongwith one lady Laxmi Singh would be coming to Delhi from Andhra Pradesh in Innova Car carrying ganja which was to be delivered to Azad @ Rakal and if raided, they could be apprehended with ganja. Accordingly, relying upon the said secret information and compliance of the provisions of the NDPS Act, a trap was laid and accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh were apprehended from the car make Innova bearing registration no. AP 35 H 3939 and total 72 Kgs 200 grams (i.e. 10 Kgs + 8 Kgs 200 grams + 22 Kgs + 22 Kgs + 10 Kgs) ganja was recovered in five plastic sacks from them. Accused Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo disclosed name of accused Azad @ Rakal as intended receiver of the ganja, and from search of Azad @ Rakal's whose house DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 4 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act 22 Kgs 795 grams ganja was recovered. Accused Azad @ Rakal disclosed the name of Farukh as his associate who sells ganja in small packets. Farukh was apprehended, but nothing was recovered from him. The name of accused Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey was disclosed by accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar, Laxmi Singh and Azad @ Rakal and name of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak was disclosed by accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo and Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey. The vehicle which was used in transportation of ganja was found registered in the name of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak and a GPS was found installed in the said Innova car which has been taken by accused Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey in his name and the said GPS was recovered at the instance of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak. On the basis of which, the present FIR was registered U/s 20/25/29 NDPS Act. The sampling of the contraband U/s 52A NDPS Act was done before Ld. MM. The ganja was seized and accused persons were arrested. The samples were sent to FSL for examination and the FSL report dated 24.01.2023 has been received confirming the substance as ganja (cannabis).
INVESTIGATION & OTHER PROCEEDINGS
2. Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet U/s 20/25/29 NDPS Act was filed against accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar, Laxmi Singh, Azad @ Rakal, Farukh, Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey and Rajender Kumar Nayak.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 5 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act CHARGE
3. Vide order on charge dated 30.05.2024, charges U/s 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act were framed against accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar, Laxmi Singh, Azad @ Rakal, Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey and Rajender Kumar Nayak; charge U/s 25 NDPS Act was framed against accused Rajender Kumar Nayak; charge U/s 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act were framed against accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh; and charge U/s 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act was framed against accused Azad @ Rakal, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
During pendency of the case, accused Azad @ Rakal died in the jail on 01.03.2026. Proceedings qua him were abated vide order dated 17.03.2026.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
4. To substantiate the aforementioned charges, the prosecution presented 36 witnesses.
5. PW-1 HC Mohit Kumar deposed that on 19.11.2022 he was posted as HC at Crime Branch, Krishna Nagar, Delhi. On that day, this witness alongwith ASI Rambir, HC Rajeev, HC Prince and W/HC Pooja left their office at about 8:12 pm vide DD No. 133A for search of drug peddlers and drug suppliers in Shahdara District area in private Eco Sports car bearing no. DL12 CB 3654 and this witness was deputed as a driver of the same. They were DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 6 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act carrying IO bag, electronic weighing machine, laptop, UPS and portable printer in the car. They passed Krishna Nagar nala road, in front of Shyam Lal College, crossed Shahdara flyover and at about 9:30 pm, while they were present near Red Cross Hospital, Dilshad Garden, one secret informer met ASI Rambir and told that three persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal and Laxmi are bringing ganja from Andhra Pradesh in silver colour Innova car bearing no. AP 35H 3939 and will give the delivery of the ganja to one Rakal at New Seemapuri between 10:30 pm to 11:00 pm. It is stated by him that at about 10:05 pm, ASI Rambir called Inspector Ashish Dahima and informed him about the secret information and also made secret informer talk to Inspector Ashish. At about 10:15 pm, Inspector Ashish called on the mobile phone of ASI Rambir and instructed him to constitute a raiding party and take necessary legal action.
It is stated by him that ASI Rambir briefed them, asked 4-5 passersby to join the investigation, but none agreed to join the investigation and left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses. No notice could be served to them due to paucity of time. Thereafter, they took position about 30- 40 steps ahead of gate of J&K Pocket, New Seemapuri. This witness was directed to park the car about 10-15 steps ahead of other team members towards Seemapuri round about. This witness came back to the other members of raiding team. All the members of raiding team were in plain clothes. ASI Rambir took position alongwith secret informer at a distance of about 10-15 steps from other raiding team members. They all were hiding and took positions.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 7 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act It is stated by him that at about 11:20 pm, one silver colour Innova car bearing no. AP-35H-3939 was seen coming from the side of Apsara border. ASI Rambir signaled them to stop the car. Secret informer left the spot after pointing out towards the car. This witness with the help of HC Prince, HC Rajeev and W/HC Pooja signaled the car to stop. After the car was stopped, ASI Rambir also came near them. Two male persons and one female were sitting in the car. Accused Noor Mohmmad whose identity they came to know later on was sitting on the driver seat. He was apprehended by HC Prince. Accused Laxmi Singh whose identity they came to know later on was sitting adjacent to driver seat. Between the legs of accused Laxmi Singh one heavy katta was lying in the car. She was apprehended by W/HC Pooja. In the rear seat of the car behind the driver seat accused Ujjwal Kumar whose identity they came to know later on was sitting. One plastic katta was lying near his legs. He was apprehended by HC Rajeev. This witness has correctly identified accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh, in the Court. On the directions of ASI Rambir, this witness brought the Eco car near the Innova car and parked the same. ASI Rambir disclosed their identities to the accused persons. Accused persons disclosed their names. ASI Rambir asked 3-4 passersby to join the investigation, but none agreed to join the investigation and left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses. No notice could be served to them due to paucity of time.
It is stated by him that the accused persons were informed that they (i.e. raiding party) have information that they (i.e. accused persons) are in possession of ganja in their car and that they may have hidden some ganja in DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 8 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act their clothes also. ASI Rambir informed the accused persons that they can search the members of raiding party and their Eco car prior to their search by them (i.e. raiding party). Accused persons were also informed by ASI Rambir that they have legal right to get themselves and their vehicle searched in presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate at the spot and if they want, they can be taken to the nearest Gazetted Officer or Magistrate before their search and search of the car. They were explained the meaning of Gazetted Officer and Magistrate in simple language.
It is stated by him that ASI Rambir prepared notices U/s 50 NDPS Act for each of the accused persons, respectively in duplicate. The same were read over to the respective accused persons. The respective original notices were served to each of the accused persons. Accused Noor Mohmmad told ASI Rambir that he cannot read or write Hindi as he is illiterate and can only sign in Hindi. He further told that he does not want to take search of the raiding team prior to his search and he does not want himself and the vehicle to be searched in presence of Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. ASI Rambir wrote refusal of accused Noor Mohmmad in his handwriting on the copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act. The refusal has also been read over to accused Noor Mohmmad in simple language. Accused Noor Mohmmad signed the same in Hindi on the copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act.
It is stated by him that accused Ujjwal Kumar told ASI Rambir that he does not want to take search of the raiding team prior to his search and he does not want himself and the vehicle to be searched in presence of Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. He wrote his refusal on the copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 9 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Act in his own handwriting in Hindi and also signed on the same.
It is stated by him that accused Laxmi Singh told ASI Rambir that she cannot read or write Hindi as she is illiterate and can only sign in English. She said that she does not want to take search of the raiding team prior to her search and she does not want herself and the vehicle to be searched in presence of Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. ASI Rambir wrote her refusal in his handwriting on the copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act in Hindi. The refusal has also been read over to the accused Laxmi Singh in simple language. Accused Laxmi Singh signed the same in English on the copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act.
The copies of notices U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh are Ex. PW-1/A, Ex. PW-1/B and Ex. PW-1/C, respectively, where the refusals of accused persons were recorded. The said respective notices also bear the carbon impression of signatures of this witness at Point-A, respectively.
It is stated by him that at about 12:06 am, in compliance of Section 50 NDPS Act, ASI Rambir informed ACP/ER-II Raj Kumar Saha regarding the proceedings. ACP Raj Kumar Saha reached the spot at about 12:20 am in plain clothes in government Etios car of white colour alongwith his driver who was also in plain clothes. On the direction of ACP, ASI Rambir took search of clothes of accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad and Ujjwal Kumar, but no contraband was found. ASI Rambir prepared nil recovery memos Ex. PW-1/D and Ex. PW-1/E of accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad and Ujjwal Kumar which bear signature of this witness at Point-A, respectively which were also DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 10 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act attested by ACP Raj Kumar Saha. On the direction of ACP, W/HC Pooja took accused Laxmi Singh inside their Eco car, covered the window glasses and took search of accused Laxmi Singh. No contraband was found from the possession of accused Laxmi Singh and ASI Rambir prepared nil recovery memo which was attested by ACP. Thereafter, on the direction of ACP, ASI Rambir took search of the car of the accused persons. The plastic katta which was lying between the legs of accused Laxmi Singh at the time of her apprehension was taken out which was tied with a rope. Upon opening the same, green colour grass like material which was having seeds, leaves and was having foul smell was found contained in the katta. On superficial testing it appeared to be ganja. ASI Rambir marked the plastic katta as 'A'. On further search of the car, one plastic katta was recovered under the driver seat which was tied with a rope. It was taken out. It was also found containing green colour grass like material which was having seeds, leaves and was having foul smell. On superficial testing it appeared to be ganja. ASI Rambir marked the plastic katta as 'B'. ASI Rambir further took out one plastic katta which was found lying near the legs of accused Ujjwal Kumar at the time of his apprehension which was tied with a rope. Upon opening the same, green colour grass like material which was having seeds, leaves and was having foul smell was found contained in the katta. On superficial testing it appeared to be ganja. ASI Rambir marked the plastic katta as 'C'.
It is stated by him that upon further search of the car two plastic kattas which were tied with ropes were recovered from the rear most seat of the car. The same were taken out by ASI Rambir. Upon opening one of the katta, DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 11 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act green colour grass like material which was having seeds, leaves and was having foul smell was found contained in the katta. On superficial testing it appeared to be ganja. ASI Rambir marked the plastic katta as 'D'. Upon opening the second katta, green colour grass like material which was having seeds, leaves and was having foul smell was found contained in the katta. On superficial testing it appeared to be ganja. ASI Rambir marked the plastic katta as 'E'.
It is stated by him that after giving instructions for further proceedings, ACP Raj Kumar Saha left the spot alongwith his official car. ASI Rambir informed the Ld. Duty MM Ms. Chikita Srivastava about the apprehension of accused Laxmi Singh.
It is stated by him that ASI Rambir measured all the five kattas containing the material on electronic weighing machine. Weight of plastic katta Mark-A was found to be 10 Kgs, weight of plastic katta Mark-B was found to be 08 Kgs and 200 grams, weight of plastic katta Mark-C was found to be 22 Kgs, weight of plastic katta Mark-D was found to be 22 Kgs and weight of plastic katta Mark-E was found to be 10 Kgs. ASI Rambir again tied the plastic kattas with the same ropes. He sealed all the plastic kattas with the seal of RS. Seal was handed over to HC Rajeev after use. ASI Rambir prepared seizure memo Ex. PW-1/F which bears his signature at Point-A. He also prepared seal handing over memo Ex. PW-1/G which bears signature of this witness at Point- A. He also took into possession the Innova car vide seizure memo Ex. PW-1/H which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. It is stated by him that ASI Rambir prepared the rukka and handed over the same to this witness alongwith copies of seizure memos, sealed parcels DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 12 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act and Innova car with directions to hand over the rukka to the Duty Officer and produce the case property alongwith other documents before SHO. This witness left the spot at about 3:45 am and reached P.S. Crime Branch, Pushp Vihar, Saket. This witness handed over the rukka to the Duty Officer while produced the sealed kattas alongwith copy of seizure memo before SHO. This witness went to the maalkhana for depositing the Innova car and handed over copy of seizure memo of the car to MHC(M). MHC(M) told this witness that due to paucity of space, the car should be parked in their unit in safe place. This witness obtained copy of FIR and original rukka from the Duty Officer. Thereafter, this went to their office in the Innova car and parked the car at the safe side of the compound of P.S. Krishna Nagar. This witness handed over copy of FIR and original rukka alongwith ignition key of Innova car to SI Monu Chauhan. ASI Rambir also met this witness at the office. ASI Rambir handed over all the three accused persons, original seizure memos, copies of notices U/s 50 NDPS Act, seal handing over memo and nil recovery memos to SI Monu Chauhan. SI Monu Chauhan arrested the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh. Arrest memos of accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad and Ujjwal Singh (Ujjwal Kumar) are Ex. PW-1/I and Ex. PW-1/J which bear signatures of this witness at Point-A, respectively. Upon search of accused Laxmi Singh one mobile phone make Realme C21Y was recovered, one mobile phone make Oppo Reno 2F was recovered from the possession of accused Noor Mohmmad and one mobile phone make Oppo K10 was recovered from the possession of accused Ujjwal Kumar. All the three mobile phones were kept open for investigation purpose DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 13 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act and SI Monu Chauhan prepared seizure memos which are Ex. PW-1/K, Ex. PW-1/L and Ex. PW-1/M, bearing signatures of this witness at Point-A, respectively. SI Monu Chauhan prepared personal search memos of accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad and Ujjwal Kumar which are Ex. PW-1/N and Ex. PW-1/O bearing signature of this witness at Point-A, respectively. From their personal search, apart from other articles the respective original notices U/s 50 NDPS Act were recovered.
It is stated by him that after the medical examination of all the three accused persons, they were produced before Ld. Duty MM and were sent to one day J/C remand.
MHC(M) has produced original notices U/s 50 NDPS Act issued in the name of accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh. Same were taken on record. The notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to Noor Mohmmad is Ex. PW-1/P, the notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Ujjwal Kumar is Ex. PW-1/Q and the notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Laxmi Singh is Ex. PW-1/R, all the notices bear signatures of this witness at Point-A, respectively.
It is stated by him that on 22.11.2022 he was present in his office. On that day on the directions of ACP, a raiding team comprising of himself, SI Monu Chauhan, HC Prince, HC Rajeev and W/HC Pooja being headed by Inspector Ashish Dahima was constituted. They left their office alongwith accused Noor Mohmmad at about 4:50 am vide GD No. 1A in Eco Sports car bearing registration number DL12-CB-3654 which was being driven by this witness for the investigation of the present case. IO SI Monu Chauhan carried DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 14 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act IO kit and electronic weighing machine with him. They followed the route through nala road, Shahdara Flyover, crossed GTB Hospital and reached DLF Mor, New Seemapuri. Thereafter, accused Noor Mohmmad led them from 70 Foota Road, by passing Nisaria Masjid, entered D-Block where this witness parked the car near Anganwadi Kendra and park. SI Monu Chauhan asked 2-3 public persons to join the raiding time, but on hearing name of Azad @ Rakal, all of them got scared and left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses. No notice could be served upon them due to paucity of time. Inspector Ashish Dahima inspected the locality and found that it was densely populated area having small houses of four storey. Inspector Ashish Dahima considering the situation called SI Shailender and other staff to the spot. After some time, SI Shailender, HC Harshit, HC Manish, HC Sudhir and ASI Raj Singh came at the spot in a silver colour Venue car. Custody of accused Noor Mohmmad was handed over to ASI Raj Singh. Thereafter, accused Noor Mohmmad led them to a gali beside Anganwadi Kendra and reached one house, on the wall of which tiles were affixed. The gate and windows of the said house were made of steel. Accused Noor Mohmmad pointed out towards the said house and told that it belongs to Azad @ Rakal. The other staff members took position around the said house. This witness alongwith HC Prince knocked the main gate of the said house. Nobody opened the door. Other residents of the neighbourhood including some ladies gathered there and started interfering in police proceedings. Inspector Ashish Dahima and SI Monu Chauhan asked them to join the investigation, but some of them refused by saying that they are 'muh bole ristedar' of accused Azad @ Rakal and some of the neighbours DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 15 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act refused to join the investigation saying that accused Azad @ Rakal is a criminal and that he has gone to jail many times and they have apprehension that he will kill them or their children. None of them disclosed their names. They also refused to take the written notice. The number of the house accused Azad @ Rakal was found to be D-124. Light was coming from the first floor of the house and there was some movement inside the house. Accused Noor Mohmmad peeped inside the steel window installed beside the gate of the house and saw one person and identified him that he is Azad @ Rakal who is intentionally not opening the gate. This witness put his hand inside the grills of the gate of the staircase in which automatic lock was installed and opened the lock and thereafter the door. There was one more gate of grill at the ground floor for entering after the gate of staircase opened by this witness. The said gate was opened. There were 2-3 steps of steel staircase to go inside the ground floor. This witness alongwith SI Monu Chauhan, HC Prince and HC Rajeev entered the ground floor where one person who was looking scared was found present. SI Monu Chauhan opened the main gate of the house from inside and accused Noor Mohmmad identified the said person from outside as accused Azad @ Rakal (correctly identified by this witness in the Court during recording of his testimony). This witness alongwith HC Prince apprehended accused Azad @ Rakal. He disclosed his name as accused Azad @ Rakal. There were sofas kept on ground floor. One stapler, three boxes of stapler pins and some small plastic pouches were lying on the ground floor. SI Monu Chauhan told accused Azad @ Rakal that they have arrested accused Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh who were coming in Innova car carrying ganja DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 16 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act to supply the same to him at New Seemapuri and that accused Noor Mohmmad has told them that earlier also many times he (accused Noor Mohmmad) has supplied ganja to him (accused Azad @ Rakal) and that they (raiding team/ police officials) are suspecting that he is carrying more ganja or other contraband in his house or in his clothes and that they have to take search of him and his house. SI Monu Chauhan also told him that he is having search warrant to take search of his house and has shown the same to accused Azad @ Rakal.
It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan apprised accused Azad @ Rakal about his legal rights by saying that he can get himself searched as well as search the raiding team in the presence of any Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate or that he can be taken to nearest Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate and also explained meaning of Gazetted Officer and Magistrate in vernacular to the accused, however accused refused to get himself searched in the presence of any Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate as well as to take search of the raiding team members. SI Monu Chauhan prepared notice U/s 50 NDPS Act on a paper keeping another paper below it and in between carbon paper was put and handed over the original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act to him. The accused told that he is illiterate and can only sign in Hindi. Thereafter, the said denial of accused was noted down by SI Monu Chauhan in his own handwriting on the carbon copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act below which the accused signed in Hindi. The carbon copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Azad @ Rakal is Ex. PW-1/S which bears signature of this witness at Point-A, signature of accused regarding receipt of the original notice at Point-B, refusal of the accused from DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 17 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Point X to X1, signatures of the accused below the refusal at Point-C and signature of this witness below the refusal at Point-D. Cursory search of the accused was taken, but no contraband was found from his possession and SI Monu Chauhan prepared nil recovery memo which is Ex. PW-1/T bearing signature of this witness at Point-A. Thereafter, accused Azad @ Rakal was left in the custody of HC Prince on the ground floor. This witness alongwith SI Monu Chauhan, HC Rajeev and W/HC Pooja went upstairs on first floor, second floor and third floor, checked the same, but no contraband was recovered. Thereafter, this witness alongwith HC Rajeev and SI Monu Chauhan came down to ground floor. SI Monu Chauhan asked W/HC Pooja to wait outside in the gali and called Inspector Ashish Dahima inside the ground floor. SI Monu Chauhan inquired the accused Azad @ Rakal about the stapler, three boxes of stapler pins and small pouches of polythene, upon which initially he got scared and avoiding the questions, but later on when he was strictly interrogated, he said that he was filling the ganja in the small pouches and stapling the same and that on seeing the police he has hidden the ganja. Thereafter, accused Azad @ Rakal got recovered one white colour heavy katta and some stapled plastic pouches containing ganja which were kept behind the sofa kept in the hall of ground floor. There were total 42 small pouches filled with ganja. SI Monu Chauhan opened and checked the contents of plastic katta and of small pouches in which badbudar, beejyukt, seelanyukt, hara, ghassnuma padharth was found. On the physical characteristics of the material, it was found to be ganja. Inspector Ashish Dahima instructed SI Monu Chauhan to do the necessary legal proceedings and thereafter went outside the house. On the DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 18 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act plastic katta "rajdhani chokar victoria food private limited" was written. The plastic katta was weighed on the electronic weighing machine which was found to be 22 Kgs and 600 grams. SI Monu Chauhan tied the opening of the katta with a plastic rope, sealed it with the seal of MC and gave the katta Mark-X. SI Monu Chauhan took a transparent plastic box, weighed it on the electronic weighing machine which was found to be 75 grams. SI Monu Chauhan emptied the contents of 42 filled small pouches into the same transparent plastic box and it was again weighed on the electronic weighing machine and was found to be 270 grams which meant that the weight of the ganja taken out from the plastic pouches was 195 grams. SI Monu Chauhan closed the lid of the plastic box; put doctors tape on the same and sealed it with the seal of MC and gave it Mark-Y. The empty 42 small pouches kept into one white colour envelope which was taped with doctor tape and it was given Mark-Z. It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan prepared seizure memo which is Ex. PW-1/U bearing signature of this witness at Point-A. He also kept the staplers, three boxes of stapler's pins and 415 small plastic pouches in a white envelope which was taped with doctor tape and sealed with the seal of MC which was given Mark-F and prepared seizure memo Ex. PW-1/V bearing signature of this witness at Point-A. Seal was handed over to HC Prince after use. SI Monu Chauhan prepared seal handing over memo Ex. PW-1/W bearing signature of this witness at Point-A. It is stated by him that the parcel of 42 pouches was also sealed with the seal of MC before preparation of seizure memo. Thereafter, on the directions of SI Monu Chauhan this witness left the spot alongwith parcels DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 19 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Mark X, Y, Z & F and copy of seizure memo in Venue car bearing no. DL8C- AY-3958 for P.S. Pushp Vihar, Crime Branch. This witness reached the office of SHO, P.S. Crime Branch at about 9:00 am. After sometime, SHO came at his office and this witness handed over parcels Mark X, Y & Z alongwith copy of seizure memo to the SHO. This witness deposited the sealed parcels Mark-F at the maalkhana. He came back to the office where his statement was recorded by the IO.
It is stated by him that on 04.01.2023 he was present in their office alongwith SI Monu Chauhan, HC Rajeev and HC Prince. They left their office in white Eco Sports car bearing no. DL12-CB-3654 which was being driven by this witness. They were carrying IO kit, electronic weighing machine, laptop, portable printer, UPS with them in the car. They took the route through nala road, Shahdara flyover, Seemapuri roundabout, Seemapuri Bus Depot and reached 70 Foota Road, near Nisaria Masjid at about 2:30 pm. This witness parked the car near Nisaria Masjid. One secret informer met SI Monu Chauhan and informed him about Farooq. Secret informer pointed out towards accused Farooq who was wearing sky blue colour shirt and was standing near Idgah and identified him as Farooq. Thereafter, secret informer left. On the directions of SI Monu Chauhan, HC Prince and HC Rajeev apprehended accused Farooq. SI Monu Chauhan introduced themselves and interrogated accused Farooq. SI Monu Chauhan also told Farooq that they have information that he may be carrying ganja. SI Monu Chauhan conducted proceedings as per Section 50 NDPS Act. Notice U/s 50 NDPS Act was given to Farooq. Accused Farooq refused to get himself searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 20 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Magistrate. His cursory search was taken, but no contraband was found. SI Monu Chauhan prepared nil recovery memo. Farooq was arrested and after his medical examination he was brought back to their office where his disclosure statement was recorded. (Farooq has already been discharged from this case).
It is stated by him that on 12.03.2023 after taking permission for out station, he alongwith SI Monu Chauhan, HC Rajeev and HC Prince left their office in Mahindra Mirazzo bearing no. DL ... 8990 (this witness does not remember complete number) for search of accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey at his native place at Bihar. This witness was driving the said vehicle. IO has kept laptop, portable printer, UPS, electronic weighing machine and IO kit in the car. On 13.03.2023 at about 3:30 pm, they reached at P.S. Bheldi, District Saran, Bihar where SI Vishnu of local police joined their team. Thereafter, they left for village Kharidah, District Saran, Bihar for search of accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey. When they reached at the main road outside the Village Kharidah, SI Monu Chauhan asked this witness to stop the car near one pedestrian. SI Monu Chauhan asked him about the whereabouts of the house of accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey saying that he is the resident of the village and also used to stay at District Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. The said person pointed out towards a three storey house on the main road and told that this is the house of Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey. Thereafter, he left without disclosing his name. No written notice could be served upon him due to paucity of time. SI Monu Chauhan asked two more pedestrians to join the raiding team, but none agreed and went away without disclosing their names and addresses. No written notice could be served upon them due to paucity of DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 21 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act time. Thereafter, this witness parked the car near the said three storey house. On hearing the voice of vehicle, one person came out of the house and on seeing them, he started running. This witness alongwith HC Rajeev chased him and apprehended him at a distance of about 100 meters. SI Monu Chauhan asked his name and he told his name as Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey. This witness correctly identified accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey in the Court. Due to some official work, SI Vishnu of local police left the spot. SI Monu Chauhan further asked 3-4 more public persons to join the raiding team, but none agreed and went away without disclosing their names and addresses. Upon inquiry accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey took out his Voter ID Card on which his address was mentioned as H.No. 356, Adarsh Colony, Part-3, Vijay Nagar, Ghaziabad, UP. Accused disclosed that in the said house, his wife namely Gudia alongwith his three children used to stay. Accused further disclosed that he is having one more house at Ram Vihar, Chaprolla, P.S. Badalpur, District Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. which is in the name of his wife Gudia.
It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan prepared notice U/s 50 NDPS Act in duplicate by putting carbon paper between two plain papers. He told the accused that they have information that he may be in possession of contraband and for this purpose they have to take his search. SI Monu Chauhan apprised the accused that he has a legal right that if he wants, he can be searched in the presence of Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate and also explained meaning of Gazetted Officer and Magistrate in vernacular to the accused, however accused told that he is illiterate and he refused to get himself DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 22 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act searched in the presence of any Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate as well as to take search of the raiding team members. SI Monu Chauhan handed over original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act to the accused. Thereafter, the said denial of accused was noted down by IO in his handwriting on the carbon copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act. The refusal of the accused was read over to the accused and he signed on the same. The carbon copy of the notice U/s 50 NDPS Act is Ex. PW-1/X bearing carbon impression of signature of this witness at Point-A, signatures of accused as receipt at Point-B, refusal of accused from Point X to X1, signatures of accused below his refusal at Point-C and signatures of this witness below the refusal at Point-D. SI Monu Chauhan took the cursory search of accused, but no contraband was found. SI Monu Chauhan prepared nil recovery memo which is Ex. PW-1/Y bearing signature of this witness at Point- A. It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan arrested the accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey vide arrest memo Ex. PW-1/Z and personally searched him vide personal search memo Ex. PW-1/Z1 which bears signature of this witness at Point-A, respectively. In the personal search of accused original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act, one mobile phone make Samsung, Rs. 1,500/- and Voter ID Card were recovered. SI Monu Chauhan recorded disclosure statement of the accused and same is Ex. PW-1/Z2 which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. Accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey was taken to P.S. Bheldi where SI Monu Chauhan got verified parcha 12 of accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad and Ujjwal Kumar. Thereafter, they came back to Delhi and reached there on 14.03.2023 and after the medical DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 23 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act examination of accused, he was produced before the Court and SI Monu Chauhan obtained 07 days PC remand.
MHC(M) has produced original notices U/s 50 NDPS Act in the name of accused persons namely Azad @ Rakal and Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey. Same are taken on record. The original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act is Ex. PW-1/Z3 which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. Original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act is Ex. PW-1/Z4 which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. The said notices were recovered from the respective personal search of accused persons.
Court observation : -
It is noted that the original notices U/s 50 NDPS Act issued by ASI Rambir Singh to accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh which are already Ex. PW-1/P, Ex. PW-1/Q and Ex. PW-1/R, respectively in the testimony of PW-1 HC Mohit Kumar on 04.10.2024.
During his cross-examination on behalf of accused Azad @ Rakal, it is stated by him that one disclosure statement of accused Noor Mohd. was recorded by SI Monu Chauhan on 20.11.2022. It is stated by him that he came to know that Rakal is also known as Azad only when his first disclosure statement was recorded by SI Monu Chauhan. It is stated by him that distance between J&K Pocket and house of accused Azad @ Rakal was about 3-4 kilometers. It is stated by him that in the intervening night of 19-20.11.2022, ASI Rambir did not use seal of MC after the apprehension of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi. It is stated by him that nobody else except SI Monu Chauhan used seal of MC in the present case. It is stated by DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 24 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.FIR No. 270/2022
(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act him that on 19.11.2022 when they were present near Red Cross Hospital, the secret informer said that the accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi will be coming from the side of Apsara border. It is stated by him that the secret informer has also told that the accused persons will pass through J&K Pocket for going towards Seemapuri. It is voluntarily stated by him that the main way to go to Seemapuri from Apsara border is after passing through J&K Pocket and there is also a small road which is also a way for going to Seemapuri from Apsara border by passing through Kallander Colony. It is stated by him that J&K Pocket was at a distance of 250-300 meters from Red Cross Hospital. It is stated by him that Red Cross Hospital was visible from the place where he took position near J&K Pocket. It is stated by him that accused persons came from the underpass of Apsara border and did not pass through the main gate of Red Cross Hospital. He does not remember, if he stated in his statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. that secret informer has informed that vehicle of accused persons will come from the side of Apsara border and will pass through J&K Pocket. It is stated by him that this fact was told to him by ASI Rambir. It is stated by him that when ASI Rambir made a call to Inspector Aashish Dahima, this witness was present there. He does not remember whether ASI Ramvir told to Inspector Aashish Dahima that vehicle of accused persons will pass through J&K Pocket after coming from the side of Apsara border. It is voluntarily stated by him that ASI Ramvir has told him about the secret information. It is stated by him that they were present on the road towards J&K Pocket near Red Cross Hospital at a distance of about 100 meters from the main gate of Red Cross Hospital when the secret informer came. It is stated by him that the main gate of the Red Cross DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 25 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.FIR No. 270/2022
(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Hospital is not situated on the road heading from Apsara border towards J&K Pocket on which they were present when the secret informer came. It is voluntarily stated by him that they have to take a turn from main road to go to the main gate of Red Cross Hospital. It is stated by him that they passed through the main gate of Red Cross Hospital for reaching the spot where secret informer came. It is stated by him that Dilshad Garden Metro Station was about at a distance of 400-500 meters from the place where secret information was received. It is stated by him that the secret informer met them between Points X and Y on the road shown in site plan Ex. PW-6/C. After again seeing Ex. PW-6/C, it is stated by this witness that the particulars mentioned in the site plan were correct. It is stated by him that CNG Pump was situated at a distance of about 300-400 meters from the place where secret informer came. It is admitted by him that the entry shown at Point-Z on site plan Ex. PW-6/C is the first entry/ exit point of J&K Pocket. It is stated by him that when ACP arrived accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi, were standing outside their vehicle. It is stated by him that the kattas containing contraband were taken out from the vehicle of accused persons after arrival of ACP. He does not remember whether any document was prepared in presence of ACP. He does not remember if ASI Ramvir recorded the secret information on any plain paper. It is stated by him that he alongwith other members of raiding team were carrying smart phones. It is stated by him that no videography or photography of the recovery proceedings were conducted in the intervening night of 19-20.11.2022 as well as on 22.11.2022. It is stated by him that on 19.11.2022 after they left their office vide DD No. 133A, they did not DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 26 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.FIR No. 270/2022
(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act stop their vehicle before they reached near the place where secret informer met. He does not remember whether ASI Ramvir or SI Monu Chauhan checked the mobile phones of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi for searching the mobile number of Rakal. It is voluntarily stated by him that their mobile phones were checked. It is stated by him that in his presence immediately after the apprehension of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi and till the proceedings were carried out by ASI Ramvir, he did not ask them to take them to the house of Rakal. It is stated by him that no cash was recovered from the said accused persons in his presence. It is stated by him that he drove the car of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi to P.S. Crime Branch and since there was no space to park the car there, he drove back the car to P.S. Krishna Nagar and parked it there inside the premises. It is stated by him that when he handed over the seizure memo of the car to MHC(M), P.S. Crime Branch, he said that there is no space at P.S. Crime Branch for parking the car and that this witness should take it to their office at P.S. Krishna Nagar for parking the same. It is stated by him that he has not made any DD entry at their office that he brought the said car there since the space was not available at P.S. Crime Branch to park the car and he handed over the ignition key of car to SI Monu Chauhan. It is stated by him that he came back to their office in the said car in the morning, but he does not remember the time. He could not tell the name of SHO, P.S. Crime Branch to whom he handed over the sealed parcels recovered from accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi. It is stated by him that in his presence SHO did not put his seal on the parcels. He could not tell whether prior to 19.11.2022 W/HC DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 27 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.FIR No. 270/2022
(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Pooja accompanied them for developing information about the drug peddlers or not or thereafter. It is stated by him that speed of vehicle of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi was medium when they were stopped. It is stated by him that he noticed their vehicle for the first time from a distance of about 60-70 meters. It is denied by him that no muh bole ristedar of the accused Azad stopped them from entering inside his house or that due to this reason no action was taken against them or none of them came to know about their names and addresses. It is denied by him that they were illegally entering into the house of accused Azad from the house of neighbours through their roofs or due to this reason the neighbour of accused were quarreling with them as they were misbehaving with them and were entering into the house of neighbours without taking their permission to reach the roof of Azad. It is denied by him that accused Azad and his family members were sleeping in their house and they illegally accosted them and falsely implicate the Azad in the present case by planting contraband upon him after illegally taking him to their office.
Cross-examination done on behalf of accused Azad @ Rakal has adopted by Ld. Counsel for accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi Singh on their behalf.
6. PW-2 Smt. Gudia Pandey deposed that she is having three children.
As per her knowledge, her husband was having mobile number 9650326199 and she used to talk to him on the said number from her mobile number 8130252076.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 28 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act During her cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, it is denied by her that she has stated to the police that on 17.03.2023 she went to the office of Crime Branch for meeting her husband where police enquired her about the mobile numbers of her husband which were told by her. She was confronted with the statement Ex. PW-2/A where it is so recorded. She could not admit or deny that her husband was also using the mobile number 8800146356. It is denied by her that she is intentionally suppressing the mobile number 8800146356 being used by her husband.
7. PW-3 Sh. Ranjay Kumar Singh deposed that he is running a cloth shop at Assam. His deceased maternal uncle Manoj Pandey used to reside at Village Kharidah, P.S. Bheldi, District Saran, Bihar. He used to visit the village of his maternal uncle often where he got acquainted with accused Devender Pandey. As far as this witness knows accused Devender Pandey was using mobile number 9650326199 and this witness used to talk to accused Devender Pandey on the said mobile phone from his (this witness's) mobile number 9101473681. This witness does not know anything else about the present case.
During his cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, it is admitted by him that when he came to know that accused Devender has been arrested by the police, he visited Karkardooma Courts on 28.03.2023 to meet him (Devender). It is denied by him that he has stated to the police that Devender Pandey was also using mobile number 8800146356 and he (this witness) used to talk to accused Devender Pandey from his (this witness's) mobile number. This witness was confronted with the statement recorded U/s DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 29 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act 161 Cr.P.C. Ex. PW-3/A where it is so recorded.
8. PW-4 Ms. Sukhi deposed that she and her husband Farooq use to run a scrap shop. Her husband is innocent. She does not know anything about the present case.
During her cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, it is stated by her that her husband has purchased one SIM card of mobile number 9560799742 on her ID i.e. Aadhaar card which was having address of E-44/A- 512, Road No. 64, Dilshad Colony which was their earlier address and the same was being used by her husband Farooq. It is denied by her that her husband Farooq used to work at the scrap shop of accused Azad @ Rakal.
9. PW-5 Sh. Rahul deposed that he knows accused Azad @ Rakal who is the resident of D-Block, Seemapuri. He got issued two SIM cards of JIO company on his ID bearing no. 8882932251 and 9354822010. He gave the said SIM cards to the son of Farooq a scrap dealer. This witness does not know anything else about the present case.
During his cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, it is stated by him that he knew accused Azad @ Rakal for the last 4-5 years. He knew accused Azad @ Rakal since he was his (this witness's) neighbour. It is admitted by him that he came to know that accused persons namely Azad @ Rakal and Farooq were arrested in the present case. Police made enquiries from this witness. It is denied by him that now he is concocting a false story regarding handing over of the SIM cards taken by him on his ID. It is denied by DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 30 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act him that he has stated to the police that he obtained the aforesaid SIM cards on the asking of accused Azad @ Rakal or that he handed over the same to accused Azad @ Rakal. He was confronted with the statement Ex. PW-5/A where it is so recorded. It is denied by him that he is suppressing true facts as he has been won over by accused Azad @ Rakal.
10. PW-6 ASI Rambir Singh deposed that on 19.11.2022 he was posted as ASI at Crime Branch ER-II, Krishna Nagar, Delhi.
He further deposed on the same lines as deposed by PW-1 HC Mohit Kumar on all other aspects.
It is further stated by him that at about 10:05 pm, he called Inspector Ashish Dahima and informed him about the secret information and also made secret informer talk to Inspector Ashish. At about 10.15 pm, Inspector Ashish called on mobile phone of this witness and told that he has talked to ACP Sh. Raj Kumar Saha who has directed to constitute a raiding party and take necessary action.
It is stated by him that they took position about 10-15 meters ahead of gate of J&K Pocket, New Seemapuri. This witness directed HC Mohit to park the car about 10-15 steps ahead of other team members towards Seemapuri roundabout. HC Mohit came back to the other members of raiding team. All the members of raiding team were in plain clothes. This witness took position alongwith secret informer at a distance of about 10-15 meters from other raiding team members. They all were hiding and took positions.
It is stated by him that no contraband was found from the DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 31 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act possession of accused Laxmi Singh in her search done by W/HC Pooja and this witness prepared nil recovery memo Ex. PW-6/A which bears his signature at Point-A which was attested by ACP.
It is stated by him that he prepared the rukka Ex. PW-6/B which bears his signature at Point-A and handed over the same to HC Mohit alongwith copy of seizure memos, sealed parcels and Innova car with directions to hand over the rukka to the Duty Officer and produce the case property alongwith other documents before SHO.
Thereafter, this witness alongwith accused persons and remaining raiding team members came back to their office. SI Monu Chauhan met this witness at the office. This witness handed over all the three accused persons, original seizure memos, copy of notices U/s 50 NDPS Act, seal handing over memo and nil recovery memo to SI Monu Chauhan.
It is stated by him that after sometime HC Mohit also came back to their office alongwith copy of FIR and original rukka. SI Monu Chauhan checked the original rukka and found that due to typographical error the time of sending of rukka was mentioned as 3:45 pm on the rukka instead of 3:45 am. At about 5:00 pm, SI Monu Chauhan called this witness through whatsapp call and thereafter this witness alongwith SI Monu Chauhan went to the spot where SI Monu Chauhan prepared site plan at instance of this witness which is Ex. PW- 6/C which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. After coming back to their office, SI Monu Chauhan recorded statement of this witness on laptop.
It is stated by him that the sampling proceedings of the recovered contraband U/s 52A NDPS Act has already been conducted by Ld. MM.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 32 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Production of case property is therefore dispensed with.
It is stated by him that he prepared report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding recovery of contraband from all the aforementioned three accused persons.
It is stated by him that the report U/s 57 NDPS Act already Ex. PW-15/C bears his signature at Point-B. The original notices U/s 50 NDPS Act given by him to accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh already Ex. PW-1/P, Ex. PW-1/Q and Ex. PW-1/R bear signature of this witness at Point-B, respectively.
During his cross-examination on behalf of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh, it is stated by him that the secret informer pointed out towards the car of the accused persons from a distance of about 100 meters. It is admitted by him that no written notice was given by him to those public persons who refused to join the investigation. It is stated by him that he had not noted down their names and addresses. It is admitted by him that no public person is a witness to the seizure memo. It is admitted by him that recovery proceedings were neither photographed nor videographed. It is stated by him that all the team members were in plain clothes when they left their office. It is stated by him that all of them were carrying their mobile phones. It is stated by him that there were DDA flats near the place of apprehension of accused persons. It is stated by him that no resident of the said flats was asked to join the investigation. It is stated by him that in his presence SI Monu Chauhan did not record statement of any public person. It is denied by him that the accused persons were not apprehended at the place and the time as narrated DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 33 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act by this witness and for the said reason neither any public witness was made a witness to the seizure proceedings, nor any photography or videography of the seizure was conducted.
During his cross-examination on behalf of accused Azad @ Rakal, it is stated by him that secret informer was not known to him prior to the date of incident. It is stated by him that the secret informer met him for the first time on 19.11.2022 at 9:30 pm. It is stated by him that they incidentally reached near Red Cross Hospital while searching for information regarding the drug peddlers. It is admitted by him that no sticker of police was affixed on their private Ecco Sports car. It is stated by him that the secret informer came from the side of Kallander Colony. It is stated by him that except the registration number of the vehicle of accused persons, no other document was recovered from the car to show that it was coming from the area of Andhra Pradesh. It is stated by him that he has not noted down the secret information on any paper between 9:30 to 10:05 pm. It is stated by him that secret informer informed that the accused persons would come from the side of Apsara border through underpass. Though, it is stated by him that he has told this fact to Inspector Ashish Dahima, however it is stated by him that he has not mentioned this fact in the rukka that the accused persons would come from the side of Apsara border through underpass. It is stated by him that the speed of the car of accused persons was normal when he first noticed the same, but he could not tell the exact speed of the car. It is stated by him that he did not try to obtain barricades from local Police Station prior to apprehension of accused persons. He could not tell if in the month of November or before that any team was constituted by DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 34 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act him including W/HC Pooja for the collection of information regarding the drug and drug peddlers. It is stated by him that the seal of RS was his personal seal and was not issued to him by the office. It is stated by him that HC Rajeev returned back the seal to him (this witness) on the next day. It is stated by him that nobody put the seal of MC at the spot. It is stated by him that on inquiries the accused persons told him that they were not aware about the address of Rakal and they cannot take them to his (Rakal's) house. It is stated by him that accused persons did not disclose about the mobile number of Rakal. It is stated by him that accused Noor Mohd. told this witness that he has met Rakal earlier, but he did not tell this witness as to where he met or when he met. It is stated by him that he did not make any attempt to obtain search warrant or search authorization between 9:30 pm to 11:20 pm. It is stated by him that W/HC Pooja was posted in their office on the date of incident.
11. PW-7 Shekh Shamim deposed that accused Azad @ Rakal is his brother-in-law (Saadu). He (this witness) is using mobile number 9318445993. He used to talk to Azad @ Rakal through his mobile number. He does not remember the mobile numbers of accused Azad @ Rakal to which he (this witness) used to make call.
During his cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, it is admitted by him that he used to call to accused Azad @ Rakal on his (accused Azad @ Rakal's) mobile numbers 9354822010 and 8882932251. This witness could not tell the said numbers earlier as he is not using his old mobile phone in which the said numbers were saved.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 35 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
12. PW-8 Sh. Milan deposed that accused Azad @ Rakal is his brother- in-law (jija). He (this witness) was using mobile number 8317302003 in the year 2023, but the mobile phone having the SIM card of said number was stolen. He used to talk to Azad @ Rakal through his (this witness's) mobile number. He does not remember the mobile numbers of accused Azad @ Rakal to which he (accused Azad @ Rakal) used to make call.
During his cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, it is admitted by him that he used to call to accused Azad @ Rakal on his (accused Azad @ Rakal's) mobile number 9354822010, but the same was used by nephew (bhanja) of this witness i.e. son of accused Azad @ Rakal. It is admitted by him that he also used to talk to accused Azad @ Rakal and probably the said number was 8882932251. This witness could not tell the said numbers earlier as he is not using his old mobile phone in which the said numbers were saved as the same was stolen.
13. PW-9 Sh. Pankaj Sharma, Nodal Officer, Reliance Jio Infocom Ltd. deposed that he is working with Reliance Jio Infocom Ltd. as Nodal Officer since the year 2018. He has been provided with specific password by the company to access the system and he is authorized by the company to retrieve the data from the system.
He has brought the print outs of CAF of mobile numbers 8882932251, 9354822010, 9692148466 and 6370798464 which were retrieved from the system. As per CAF, the mobile numbers 8882932251 and DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 36 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act 9354822010 were registered in the name of Rahul, S/o Rakesh; mobile number 9692148466 was registered in the name of Hantal Dambu, S/o Sh. Aita Hantal and mobile number 6370798464 was registered in the name of Rukman Khara, S/o Paradeshi Khara. The print outs of CAF alongwith ID proof are Ex. PW-9/A (Colly) which bears counter signature of this witness at Points A, B, C and D alongwith his certificate U/s 65B of IEA.
He has brought the CAFS and CDRs of mobile numbers 8882932251 (for a period from 25.09.2022 to 22.11.2022 running into 147 pages), 9354822010 (for a period from 01.06.2022 to 21.11.2022 running into 322 pages), 9692148466 (for a period from 25.08.2022 to 20.11.2022 running into 216 pages) and 6370798464 (for a period from 15.10.2022 to 20.11.2022 running into 92 pages) retrieved from the system and copied in a CD alongwith certificate U/s 65B of IEA of this witness. The CD is Ex. PW-9/B. His certificate U/s 65B of IEA is Ex. PW-9/C bearing his signature at Point-A.
14. PW-10 ASI Naresh Kumar deposed that on 19.11.2022, he was posted at P.S. Crime Branch, Pushp Vihar, Delhi as ASI and was working as Duty Officer from 8:00 pm to 8:00 am. At about 5:14 am on 20.11.2022, HC Mohit brought the rukka sent by ASI Rambir, contents of which were dictated by this witness to the Computer Operator and the FIR was registered vide FIR No. 270/2022 and computerized copy of FIR was obtained. This witness had handed over the copy of FIR and the original rukka to HC Mohit to hand over the same to SI Monu Chauhan as investigation was marked to him. The copy of FIR is Ex. PW-10/1 bearing signature of this witness at Point-A (OSR). This DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 37 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act witness had made endorsement on the rukka and the same is Ex. PW-10/2 bearing his signature at Point-A. In this regard, the certificate U/s 65-B of the Evidence Act is Ex. PW-10/3 bearing signature of this witness at Point-A. Copy of GD Entry No. 9A regarding registration of FIR is Ex. PW-10/4 which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. During his cross-examination on behalf of accused Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey, it is stated by him that the investigation was marked to SI Monu Chauhan on the directions of senior officers as per Ex. PW-10/2. It is stated by him that he had not received personally any written order/ oral directions from the senior officers regarding the same. It is voluntarily stated by him that he had received the directions as per Ex. PW-10/2.
15. PW-11 Sh. Ajay Kumar, Nodal Officer, Bharti Airtel Ltd. deposed that he is working with Bharti Airtel Ltd. as Nodal Officer since the year 2007. He has been provided with specific password by the company to access the system and he is authorized by the company to retrieve the data from the system.
He has brought the print outs of CAF of mobile numbers 9560799742, 9060891657, 8826671401, 9065436476, 8800146356 and 9650326199 which were retrieved from the system alongwith his certificate U/s 65B of IEA of even date. As per CAF, the mobile number 9560799742 was registered in the name of Sukhi W/o Abdul Kadir; mobile number 9060891657 was registered in the name of Noor Mohammad S/o Mohammad Samsuddin; mobile number 8826671401 was registered in the name of Gaurav Jain S/o DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 38 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Munish Kumar Jain; mobile number 9065436476 was registered in the name of Ujjwal Kumar S/o Nagender Pandey; mobile number 8800146356 was registered in the name of Pratima Tirki W/o Korenesh Tirki and mobile number 9650326199 was registered in the name of Devender Pandey S/o R.N. Pandey. The print out of CAF is Ex. PW-11/A (Colly) which bears counter signature of this witness at Points A, B, C, D, E and F. His certificate U/s 65B of IEA qua the print outs of CAF is Ex. PW-11/B which bears his signature at Point-A. His certificate U/s 65B of IEA qua the print outs of CAF in respect of mobile number 9650326199 is Ex. PW-11/C which bears his signature at Point-A. He has brought the CDRs of mobile number 9560799742 from 01.09.2022 to 04.01.2023 alongwith his certificate U/s 65B of IEA. The print outs of CDR of the said number running into 91 pages is Ex. PW-11/D (Colly) bearing his counter signatures on first and last pages at Point-A. He has brought the CDRs of mobile number 9060891657 from 01.04.2022 to 30.08.2022 alongwith his certificate U/s 65B of IEA. The print outs of CDR of the said number running into 178 pages is Ex. PW-11/E (Colly) bearing his counter signatures on first and last page at Point-A. He has brought the CDRs of mobile number 8826671401 from 20.07.2022 to 20.11.2022 alongwith his certificate U/s 65B of IEA. The print outs of CDR of the said number running into 214 pages is Ex. PW-11/F (Colly) bearing his counter signatures on first and last page at Point-A. He has brought the CDRs of mobile number 9065436476 from 01.09.2022 to 20.11.2022 alongwith his certificate U/s 65B of IEA. The print outs of CDR of the said number running into 133 pages is Ex. PW-11/G (Colly) DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 39 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act bearing his counter signatures on first and last page at Point-A. He has brought the CDRs of mobile number 8800146356 from 01.06.2022 to 13.03.2023 alongwith his certificate U/s 65B of IEA. The print outs of CDR of the said number running into 140 pages is Ex. PW-11/H (Colly) bearing his counter signatures on first and last page at Point-A. He has brought the CDRs of mobile number 9650326199 from 01.06.2022 to 13.03.2023 alongwith his certificate U/s 65B of IEA. The print outs of CDR of the said number running into 62 pages is Ex. PW-11/I (Colly) bearing his counter signatures on first and last page at Point-A. This witness exhibited his certificate U/s 65B of IEA qua the print outs of CDR of all mobile numbers as Ex. PW-11/J which bears his signature at Point-A.
16. PW-12 ASI Satyavir deposed that on 13.12.2022 he was posted at P.S. Crime Branch. On that day on the direction of SI Monu Chauhan, he obtained two sealed parcels i.e. one plastic katta and one plastic box from MHC(M), Crime Branch which were marked as X and Y. Both were sealed with one seal of MC and one seal of RS, respectively. Thereafter, this witness reached in the Court of Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM, Karkardooma Court where SI Monu Chauhan and HC Rajeev and photographer also met this witness. Accused Azad @ Rakal was also present there alongwith his counsel. On the direction of the Ld. MM the sampling proceedings were conducted after de-sealing the parcels Mark X and Mark Y and two samples each from the contents of both the parcels were taken and kept in separate containers which DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 40 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act were marked as Mark X1 and X2, Y1 and Y2. All the parcels were sealed with the seal of BA. Ld. MM also affixed a sample seal. This witness took all the four sealed parcels containing samples and sealed parcels Mark X and Y alongwith sample seal and deposited the same at the maalkhana of P.S. Crime Branch.
17. PW-13 ASI Jagbir deposed that on 15.12.2022 he was posted at P.S. Crime Branch. On that day on the direction of SI Monu Chauhan, he obtained five sealed parcels i.e. five plastic kattas from MHC(M), Crime Branch which were marked as A, B, C, D and E. Each of the kattas were sealed with two seals of RS. Thereafter, this witness reached the Court of Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM, Karkardooma Court where SI Monu Chauhan and HC Rajeev and photographer also met this witness. Accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh were present there.
It is stated by him that on the direction of the Ld. MM the sampling proceedings were conducted after de-sealing the parcels Mark A, B, C, D and E and two samples each from the contents of each of the parcels were taken and kept in separate containers which were marked as Mark A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2, D1, D2, E1 and E2. All the parcels were sealed with the seal of BA. Ld. MM also affixed a sample seal. This witness took all the 10 sealed parcels containing samples and sealed parcels Mark A, B, C, D and E alongwith sample seal and deposited the same at the maalkhana of P.S. Crime Branch.
18. PW-14 Sh. Daya Maya Mallick deposed that since 04.05.2021 he DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 41 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act has been posted as Sub-Assistant Jailer, Koraput, Odisha. On 01.05.2023 ASI Satender from Crime Branch, Delhi, visited their jail to interrogate Pratima Tirkey, who was an under-trial prisoner, in connection with the present case. ASI Satender was not having the permission from Additional Sessions Judge- cum-Special Judge, Koraput to interrogate Pratima Tirkey. They refused for the interrogation thereafter, Superintendent of Jail, Koraput sought permission from the Court for interrogation and when it was granted, ASI Satender interrogated Pratima Tirkey in presence of this witness regarding the mobile phone.
It is stated by him that during interrogation UTP Pratima Tirkey informed ASI Satender that she had given her SIM Card to one Devender Pandey in the year 2017. Statement of this witness in this case was recorded by ASI Satender, P.S. Crime Branch.
19. PW-15 ASI Raj Kumar has brought original diary registers of the years 2022 and 2023 of ACP Office ER-II Crime, Delhi alongwith reports U/s 57 of the NDPS Act and copy of DD No. 42A available in their record. The same were taken on judicial record.
It is stated by him that he is posted as Reader to ACP ER-II Crime Branch since May 2022. On 20.11.2022 copy of DD number 143A made by Inspector Dahima was received in their office. This witness placed the same before ACP Raj Kumar Saha and it was seen and signed by him. This witness made entry in the diary register vide serial no. 1269. On the same day, report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by ASI Rambir Singh was received in their office vide diary no. 1270. Report was seen and signed by the then ACP Sh. Raj DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 42 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Kumar Saha. On the same day, another report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act was received in their office vide diary no. 1271. Report was seen and signed by the then ACP Sh. Raj Kumar Saha. Copies of diary no. 1269, 1270 and 1271 are Ex. PW-15/A (OSR). Copy of DD No. 143A received in their office is Ex. PW- 15/B bearing signatures of ACP Raj Kumar Saha at Point-A. The report U/s 57 NDPS Act prepared by ASI Rambir Singh is Ex. PW-15/C bearing signatures of ACP Raj Kumar Saha at Point-A. The report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan is Ex. PW-15/D bearing signatures of ACP Raj Kumar Saha at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 22.11.2022 report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan was received in their office vide diary no. 1284. This witness placed the same before ACP Raj Kumar Saha and it was seen and signed by him. Copy of diary no. 1284 is Ex. PW-15/E (OSR). The report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan is Ex. PW-15/F bearing signatures of ACP Raj Kumar Saha at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 05.01.2023 report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan was received in their office vide diary no.
23. This witness placed the same before ACP Raj Kumar Saha and it was seen and signed by him. Copy of diary no. 23 is Ex. PW-15/G (OSR). The report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan is Ex. PW-15/H bearing signatures of ACP Raj Kumar Saha at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 14.03.2023 report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan was received in their office vide diary no.
147. This witness placed the same before ACP Raj Kumar Saha and it was seen DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 43 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act and signed by him. Copy of diary no. 147 is Ex. PW-15/I (OSR). The report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan is Ex. PW-15/J bearing signatures of ACP Raj Kumar Saha at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 01.04.2023 report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by ASI Netra Pal Singh was received in their office vide diary no.
185. On that day ACP Raj Kumar Saha was on leave and ACP Sh. Mangesh Gedam was looking after the work of ACP ER-II Crime Branch. This witness placed the same before ACP Mangesh Gedam and it was seen and signed by him. Copy of diary no. 185 is Ex. PW-15/K (OSR). The report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by ASI Netra Pal Singh is Ex. PW-15/L bearing signatures of ACP Mangesh Gedam at Point-A. During his cross-examination on behalf of accused persons, it is stated by him that no GD No. 1A dated 22.11.2022 was received in the office of ER-II, Crime Branch. It is stated by him that no record is maintained regarding search warrants/ authorization issued by ACP. It is admitted by him that in his presence no search warrants/ authorization was issued by ACP in the present case.
20. PW-16 ACP Mangesh Gedam deposed that on 01.04.2023 he was posted as ACP ER-III Crime Branch. On that day, he was also looking after the work of ACP ER-II Crime Branch. Reader to ACP ER-II placed before this witness report U/s 57 of the NDPS Act prepared by ASI Netrapal regarding arrest of accused Rajender Kumar Naik which was seen by this witness and signed by him at Point-A. DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 44 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
21. PW-17 retired SI Ishwar Prakash deposed that on 13.12.2022 he was posted as SI in Photo Section, Crime Branch, Kamla Market. On that day the Incharge, Photo Section directed this witness to reach Karkardooma Courts in the Court of Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM, Court No.48 qua proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act in FIR No. 270/2022, P.S. Crime Branch. This witness accordingly reached there, where SI Monu Chauhan met him and accused persons were present. MHC(M) produced maalkhana register alongwith sealed case property and same was produced before Ld. MM. The Ld. MM directed this witness to take photographs of the case property and as per the directions of Ld. MM this witness had clicked the photographs of the proceedings with official digital camera. The sampling of the contraband was also got done by the Ld. MM. After the sampling was done, the case property and samples were sealed with the seal of Ld. MM. This witness had clicked 26 photographs of the proceedings as per directions of Ld. MM through digital camera.
Colour photographs of the proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act were shown to the witness from the judicial file and witness has identified the photographs as Ex. PW-17/A1 to Ex. PW-17/A26, which were clicked by him on 13.12.2022.
It is stated by him that a certificate U/s 65B of IEA qua the print out of the photographs clicked by him on 13.12.2022 has been issued by him and same is Ex. PW-17/B which bears his signature at Point-A. Thereafter, on 15.12.2022 this witness again went to Court No. 48, Karkardooma Courts qua proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act in FIR No. 270/2022, DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 45 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act P.S. Crime Branch, where ASI Jagvir from Maalkhana, P.S. Crime Branch was present and he produced the case property of the present case before Ld. MM and the case property was in sealed condition, however this witness unable to recollect the initial of the seal. The sampling of the contraband was got done by the Ld. MM. After the sampling was done, the case property and samples were sealed with the seal of Ld. MM. This witness had clicked 52 photographs of the proceedings as per directions of Ld. MM through digital camera.
52 colour photographs of the proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act carried out on 15.12.2022 were shown to the witness from the judicial file and witness has identified the photographs as Ex. PW-17/C1 to Ex. PW-17/C52, which were clicked by him.
It is stated by him that a certificate U/s 65B of IEA qua the print out of the photographs clicked by him on 15.12.2022 has been issued by him and same is Ex. PW-17/D which bears his signature at Point-A. This witness has brought the CD containing photographs taken by him of sampling proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act before Ld. MM on 13.12.2022 and 15.12.2022, which was available in his erstwhile office of Photo Section, Crime Branch, Kamla Market, Delhi. The CD was taken on record.
The CD was played in the computer system of the Court. It contains soft copies of 26+52 photographs of sampling proceedings tallying with the print outs of the photographs already on record. The CD is Ex. P-17/P1.
22. PW-18 ASI Mukesh Kumar deposed that on 20.11.2022, he was DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 46 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act working as MHC(M) at P.S. Crime Branch. On that day at about 6:00 am, SHO/ Inspector Govind Chauhan called this witness in his office and handed over to this witness five sealed parcels and carbon copy of seizure memo for depositing the case property in maalkhana. The pullandas were bearing seals of MC and RS. Accordingly, as per the details of the seizure memo and case property, this witness made entry in register no. 19 at serial no. 5965. Same is Ex. PW-18/A (OSR). Inspector Govind Chauhan also counter signed the entry in register no. 19 at Point-A. It is stated by him that on the same day, SI Monu Chauhan deposited personal search articles of the accused Laxmi Singh D/o Late Bijay Singh; personal search articles of Ujjwal Kumar S/o Nagender Pandey and personal search articles of Noor Mohd. @ Babloo S/o Mohd. Samsuddin in the maalkhana. This witness made entry vide the serial number 5966 qua accused Laxmi Singh, at sl. no. 5967 qua accused Ujjwal Kumar and at sl. no. 5968 qua accused Noor Mohd. in this regard in register no. 19. Copies of entries are Ex. PW-18/B, Ex. PW-18/C and Ex. PW-18/D. It is stated by him that on the same day, ASI Rambir deposited one Innova car of silver colour bearing no. AP 35H 3939, Engine No. 2KD6077914 and Chassis No. MBJ11JV4004126020 through copy of seizure memo. This witness made entry in register no. 19 at sl. no. 5969. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/E. It is stated by him that on 22.11.2022, Inspector Ranvir Singh under present case FIR had deposited the sealed case property as detailed in the entry, through copy of seizure memo. This witness made entry in register no. 19 at sl. no. 5982. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/F. It is stated by him that on the same day, SI Monu Chauhan under present case FIR, has deposited DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 47 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act two sealed envelope parcels, as detailed in entry no. 5983, through copy of seizure memo in maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no.19 at sl. no. 5983. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/G. It is stated by him that on the same day, SI Monu Chauhan under present case FIR, has deposited original notice U/s 50 of the NDPS Act served upon accused Azad @ Rakal as detailed in entry no. 5984 in maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no. 19 at sl. no. 5984. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/H. It is stated by him that on 10.12.2022, SI Monu Chauhan under present case FIR, has deposited one sealed envelope parcel sealed with the seal of MC which is stated to have contained the mobile phone Oppo of accused Azad @ Rakal, as detailed in entry no. 6093, through copy of seizure memo in maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no. 19 at sl. no. 6093. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/I. It is stated by him that on the same day, SI Monu Chauhan under present case FIR, has deposited one sealed envelope parcel sealed with the seal of MC which is stated to have contained the mobile phone Oppo K-10 of accused Ujjwal Kumar, as detailed in entry no. 6094, through copy of seizure memo in maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no. 19 at sl. no. 6094. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/J. It is stated by him that on the same day, SI Monu Chauhan under present case FIR, has deposited one sealed envelope parcel sealed with the seal of MC which is stated to have contained the mobile phone Oppo Reno 2F of accused Noor Mohd., as detailed in entry no. 6095, through copy of seizure memo in maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no. 19 at sl. no. 6095. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/K. It is stated by him that on the same day, SI DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 48 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Monu Chauhan under present case FIR, has deposited one sealed envelope parcel sealed with the seal of MC which is stated to have contained the mobile phone Realme C-21Y of accused Laxmi Singh D/o Bijay Singh, as detailed in entry no. 6096, through copy of seizure memo in maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no. 19 at sl. no. 6096. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW- 18/L. It is stated by him that on 04.01.2023, SI Monu Chauhan under present case FIR, has deposited the personal search articles and original notice U/s 50 of the NDPS Act served upon accused Farukh S/o Afzal as detailed in entry no. 5738 in maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no.19 at sl. no. 5738. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/M. It is stated by him that on 06.01.2023, SI Monu Chauhan under present case FIR, has deposited one sealed envelope sealed with the seal of MC containing Samsung black colour mobile phone of Farukh, through seizure memo in maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no. 19 at sl. no. 5765. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/N. It is stated by him that on 14.03.2022, SI Monu Chauhan under present case FIR, has deposited the personal search articles and original notice U/s 50 of the NDPS Act served upon accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey S/o Ramanandan Pandey as detailed in entry no. 6289 in maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no. 19 at sl. no. 6289. The copy of the said entry is Ex. PW-18/O. The mobile phone of the accused for the purpose of investigation was put on condition vide DD No. 132A dated 14.03.2023 and the phone was switched off on 17.03.2023.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 49 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act It is stated by him that the above-mentioned entries also bears his signatures at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 13.12.2022 for the compliance of Section 52A NDPS Act the case property which was sealed with the seals of MC and RS, was produced before the Court of Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM, Court No. 48, KKD. After compliance of Section 52A NDPS Act was made, ASI Satyavir, No. 116/CR deposited the case property in maalkhana, which was sealed with the seal of BA. In this regard, this witness made entry in register no. 19 against sl. no. 5982 at Point-X and the entry is already Ex. PW-18/F, which bears his signature at Point-B. It is stated by him that on 15.12.2022 for compliance of Section 52A NDPS Act the case property which was sealed with the seals of MC and RS, was produced before the Court of Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM, Court No. 48, KKD. After compliance of Section 52A NDPS Act was made, ASI Jagvir, No. 3548/SHD deposited the case property in maalkhana, which was sealed with the seal of BA. In this regard, this witness made entry in register no. 19 against sl. no. 5965 at Point-X and the entry is already Ex. PW-18/A, which bears his signature at Point-B. It is stated by him that so long as the case property including samples remained in his possession, same remained intact and not tampered.
He has produced the register no.19 containing above-mentioned entries. Original register seen and returned.
It is stated by him that the further entries in register no.19 qua present case FIR have been made by his successor HC Rakesh, No. 552/Crime DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 50 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act and he has sent the case property to the FSL and received back the same. He is presently posted as Duty Officer in P.S. Crime Branch.
During his cross-examination on behalf of accused Azad @ Rakal, it is stated by him that he was having charge of MHC(M) from April 2022 till 05.01.2023. It is stated by him that after 20.11.2022 till 05.01.2023, in his absence due to leave, HC Rakesh used to look after the affairs of the maalkhana. It is stated by him that the seal RS was used by Inspector Govind Chauhan on 20.11.2022 on the case property pullandas. It is stated by him that Inspector Ranvir Singh was also using the seal bearing initials RS. It is voluntarily stated by him that he (Inspector Ranvir Singh) was regular SHO. It is admitted by him that as per record, the case property being deposited by SI Monu Chauhan, used to bear initials of MC. It is stated by him that in his tenure of posting at P.S. Crime Branch, he had not seen Inspector Govind Chauhan using the seal of MC. It is stated by him that Inspector Govind Chauhan had joined the P.S. Crime Branch on temporary basis because Inspector Ranvir Singh was on leave and during that period, he used the seal bearing initials RS. It is admitted by him that in column no.4 at Ex. PW-18/A it is nowhere mentioned by him that the case property deposited by Inspector Govind Chauhan in maalkhana was also having the seal of MC besides RS. It is admitted by him that in column no.4 the contents of the seizure memo were reproduced by him as it is. It is admitted by him that Ex. PW-18/B, Ex. PW-18/C, Ex. PW-18/D, Ex. PW-18/G, Ex. PW- 18/H, Ex. PW-18/I, Ex. PW-18/J, Ex. PW-18/K, Ex. PW-18/M and Ex. PW- 18/N does not bear signatures of SI Monu Chauhan in column no.2. It is stated by him that Inspector Gobind Chauhan and Inspector Ranvir Singh never DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 51 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act submitted any inventory to him. It is admitted by him that there is no separate entry qua sending of the case property to the Court for compliance of Section 52A NDPS Act on 13.12.2022 and 15.12.2022 was made by him and the entry appearing at Point-X on Ex. PW-18/A and Ex. PW-18/F was made after the compliance of Section 52A NDPS Act and case property was resubmitted in the maalkhana. It is stated by him that the Innova car was brought by SI Monu Chauhan alongwith HC Mohit on 20.11.2022 at about 8:00 am. It is stated by him that he mentioned the name of SI Monu Chauhan in column no.2 of register no.19 Ex. PW-18/E as the depositor. It is again stated by him that he did not mention in register no.19, the name of SI Monu Chauhan as the depositor of Innova car, rather he had mentioned name of ASI Rambir as the depositor of case property i.e. Innova car in maalkhana.
23. PW-19 Sh. Pankaj Garg, Cluster Head, Fino Payments Bank has brought the print outs of Account Opening Form, PAN Card and statement of account of account no. 20260571590 alongwith his certificate U/s 2A of Bankers Book Evidence Act, 1891. As per Account Opening Form the said account was registered in the name of Ujjwal S/o Nagender Pandey R/o Jalalpura Tole Kharidahan, Apahar, Saran, Bihar. The print out of Account Opening Form is Ex. PW-19/A which bears signature of this witness and seal on each of pages. The statement of account for the period from 31.05.2022 to 31.03.2023 of the said account running into nine pages which is Ex. PW-19/B bearing his stamp and seal at Point-A. Certificate U/s 2A of Bankers Book Evidence Act, 1891, of this witness is Ex. PW-19/C which bears his signature at DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 52 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Point-A.
24. PW-20 HC Rajeev deposed that on 19.11.2022, he was posted as HC at ER-II, Crime Branch, Krishna Nagar, Delhi. On that day, he alongwith ASI Rambir, HC Mohit, HC Prince and W/HC Pooja left their office at about 8:12 pm vide DD No. 133A for developing information about drug peddlers and drug suppliers in Shahdara District area in private Ecco Sports car of white colour bearing no. DL12-CB-3654.
He deposed on the same lines as deposed by PW-1 HC Mohit Kumar and PW-6 ASI Rambir Singh on all other aspects.
It is stated by him that ASI Rambir took position alongwith secret informer at a distance of about 10-15 steps from other raiding team members towards underpass Apsara Boarder.
It is stated by him that after apprehension, the accused persons were informed that they have information that they are in possession of ganja in their car and they are bringing the same from Andhra Pradesh and that they may have hidden some ganja in their clothes also. ASI Rambir told the accused persons that they (raiding team members) have to search them and their car and they (accused persons) can take search of the members of raiding party and their Ecco car prior to their search by them (raiding team members). ASI Rambir apprised all the three accused persons about their legal rights that if they wish, they as well as their vehicle can be searched in presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate at the spot and if they want, they can be taken to the nearest Gazetted Officer or Magistrate for the purpose of their search and search of the DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 53 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act car. They were explained the meaning of Gazetted Officer and Magistrate in simple language.
It is stated by him that accused Noor Mohd. signed on the copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act as the receipt of original notice. The copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Noor Mohd. already Ex. PW-1/A bears his signatures at Point-D as receipt of the notice, bears the carbon impressions of signatures of this witness at Point-F, refusal of accused from Points X to X1, signatures of accused Noor Mohd. below his refusal at Point-E and signatures of this witness below refusal at Point-F1.
It is stated by him that accused Ujjwal signed on the copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act as the receipt of original notice. The copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Ujjwal already Ex. PW-1/B bears his signatures at Point-D as receipt of the notice, bears the carbon impressions of signatures of this witness at Point-F, refusal of accused from Point X to X1, signatures of accused Ujjwal below his refusal at Point-E and signatures of this accused below refusal at Point-F1.
It is stated by him that accused Laxmi signed on the copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act as the receipt of original notice. The copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Laxmi already, Ex. PW-1/C bears her signatures at Point-D as receipt of the notice, bears the carbon impressions of signatures of this witness at Point-F, refusal of accused from Points X to X1, signatures of accused Laxmi below her refusal at Point-E and signatures of this witness below refusal at Point-F1.
It is stated by him that at about 12:06 am, ASI Rambir informed DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 54 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act ACP/ER-II Raj Kumar Saha through mobile phone regarding the proceedings and apprehension of accused persons pursuant to the secret information.
It is stated by him that upon opening the kattas recovered during search of the car of accused persons, greenish colour grass like material which was having seeds, leaves, flowers and was having foul smell was found contained in the kattas. On superficial testing by smelling and from the physical appearance, it appeared to be ganja.
It is stated by him that ASI Rambir informed the Ld. Duty MM Ms. Chikita Srivastava about the apprehension of accused Laxmi Singh as the accused was a lady. After giving instructions for further proceedings, ACP Raj Kumar Saha left the spot alongwith his official car.
It is stated by him that ASI Rambir prepared the rukka and handed over the same to HC Mohit alongwith copy of seizure memos, sealed parcels and Innova car with directions to hand over the rukka to the Duty Officer of P.S. Crime Branch and produce the sealed kattas alongwith other documents before SHO of P.S. Crime Branch. HC Mohit left the spot at about 3:45 am alongwith Innova car of the accused persons.
Thereafter, this witness alongwith ASI Rambir, W/HC Pooja, HC Prince and all three accused persons came to their office i.e. ER-II, Crime Branch in their Ecco Car. In the office, HC Mohit came back from office Crime Branch and handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to SI Monu Chauhan.
It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan entered the FIR number and other particulars on the documents prepared by ASI Rambir.
It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan recorded disclosure DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 55 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act statements of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi Singh, which are Ex. PW-20/A, Ex. PW-20/B and Ex. PW-20/C bearing signatures of this witness at Point-A, respectively.
It is stated by him that the original notices U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Noor Mohmmad already Ex. PW-1/P; to accused Ujjwal Kumar already Ex. PW-1/Q and to accused Laxmi Singh already Ex. PW-1/R bear signature of this witness at Point-C, respectively.
It is stated by him that on 22.11.2022, on the directions of ACP, a raiding team comprising of himself, SI Monu Chauhan, HC Prince, HC Mohit and W/HC Pooja being headed by Inspector Ashish Dahima was constituted for search of accused Azaad @ Rakal.
It is stated by him that after reaching the locality of accused Azad @ Rakal, accused Noor Mohammad pointed out towards a house and told that it belongs to Azad @ Rakal. The other staff members took position around the said house. HC Mohit alongwith HC Prince knocked the main gate of the said house. Nobody opened the door, however, sounds were coming from inside. Other residents of the neighbourhood including some ladies, who were also found to be relatives of accused Azad @ Rakal gathered there. The relatives of accused Azad @ Rakal started interfering in police proceedings. Inspector Ashish Dahima and SI Monu Chauhan asked them to join the investigation, but some of them refused by saying that they are ' muh bole ristedar' of accused Azad @ Rakal and some of the neighbours refused to join the investigation saying that accused Azad @ Rakal is a criminal and that he has gone to jail many times and they have apprehension that he will kill them or their children.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 56 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act None of them disclosed their names. They also refused to take the written notice.
It is stated by him that the number of the house accused Azad @ Rakal was found to be D-1..., but exact number, he does not remember, however, it was situated in D-Block, New Seemapuri.
It is stated by him that in the house of accused Azad @ Rakal, there was one more gate of steel having grill at the ground floor for entering after the gate of staircase opened by this witness.
It is stated by him that after preparing seizure memo qua case property recovered from house of accused Azad @ Rakal, on the directions of SI Monu Chauhan, HC Mohit left the spot alongwith parcels mark X, Y, Z and F and copy of seizure memo for P.S. Pushp Vihar Crime Branch.
It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan prepared site plan of place of recovery of contraband from the house of accused Azad @ Rakal, which is Ex. PW-20/D bearing signatures of this witness at Point-A. Accused Azad @ Rakal was arrested vide arrest memo, which is Ex. PW-20/E bearing signatures of this witness at Point-A. One mobile phone make OPPO was recovered from the possession of accused Azad @ Rakal and the same was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW-20/F bearing signatures of this witness at Point-A. The mobile phone was kept open for the purpose of investigation. Accused Azad @ Rakal was also personally searched vide personal search memo, which is Ex. PW-20/G, bearing signatures of this witness at Point-A. Original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act was recovered from his personal search. The original notice recovered from the personal search of DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 57 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act accused Azad @ Rakal, already Ex. PW-1/Z3 bearing signatures of this witness at Point-B. Thereafter, they brought back accused Azad @ Rakal to their office after his medical examination. SI Monu Chauhan recorded disclosure statement of accused Azad @ Rakal, which is Ex. PW-20/H bearing signatures of this witness at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 13.12.2022, he alongwith SI Monu Chauhan went to the Court of Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM, KKD Courts, Delhi where accused Azad @ Rakal was also produced from J/C. ASI Satvir produced two sealed parcels. Ld. MM conducted the sampling proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act and two samples each were drawn from the contents of both aforesaid parcels. SI Ishwar Prakash took the photographs of the sampling proceedings.
It is stated by him that on 15.12.2022, he alongwith SI Monu Chauhan went to the Court of Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM, KKD Courts, Delhi where accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi Singh were also produced from J/C. ASI Jagvir produced five sealed parcels. Ld. MM conducted the sampling proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act and two samples each were drawn from the contents of all the five aforesaid parcels. SI Ishwar Prakash took the photographs of the sampling proceedings.
It is stated by him that on 16.12.2022 on the directions of IO, he obtained seven sealed parcels alongwith two sample seals of BA and FSL form from MHC(M) vide RC No. 852/21/22. On that day, this witness also obtained four sealed parcels of the mobile phone alongwith sample seal of MC on DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 58 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act forwarding letter vide RC No. 851/21/22. This witness deposited the parcels at FSL, Rohini, Delhi; came back to Police Station and deposited the receipt of FSL with MHC(M).
It is stated by him that till the time the case properties were in his possession, the same have not been tampered with.
The copy of RC No. 852/21/22 is Ex. PW-20/I (OSR) which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. Copy of receipt of FSL is Ex. PW-20/J (OSR) which bears his signature at Point-A. The copy of RC No. 851/21/22 is Ex. PW-20/K (OSR) which bears his signature at Point-A. Copy of receipt of FSL is Ex. PW-20/L (OSR) which bears his signature at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 04.01.2023, he joined the investigation with SI Monu Chauhan, HC Prince and HC Mohit and on the basis of secret information, one Farooq was apprehended near Idgah, Seemapuri and arrested. His cursory search was taken, but no contraband was found. (Farooq has already been discharged in this case).
It is stated by him that on 12.03.2023 after taking permission for out station, he alongwith SI Monu Chauhan, HC Mohit and HC Prince left their office in Mahindra Mirazzo bearing no. DL 7CQ 8990 for search of accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey at his native place at Bihar. The said vehicle was driven by this witness, HC Mohit and HC Prince in turn on their way.
It is stated by him that after arrest of accused Devender, SI Monu Chauhan obtained his 07 days PC remand. During PC remand the accused Devender made further disclosure that he obtained SIM of mobile number 8800146356 in the name of his known to Pratima Tirki and was using the same, DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 59 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act in this regard SI Monu Chauhan recorded his supplementary disclosure statement which is Ex. PW-20/L1 bearing signature of this witness at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 30.03.2023 he joined the investigation with ASI Netra Pal Singh and HC Prince. On that day after taking permission from the senior officers, they left for out station District Ganjam, Orissa by train. On 31.03.2023 late in the night they got down at Bhuvneshwar Railway Station and from there they proceeded for P.S. Baguda, District Ganjam, Orissa in the bus and reached there in the morning of 01.04.2023. ASI Netrapal got recorded their arrival entry in the Police Station. One ASI from the local Police Station, whose name he does not remember joined their team. They disclosed the address and name of accused Rajender Singh Nayak to the ASI of local police and thereafter they alongwith said ASI reached at Village Karisinghi in a local three wheeler tempo. All of them were in civil dress.
It is stated by him that ASI of local police called his informer there, apprised him about the facts and the name of accused Rajender Singh Nayak. The informer pointed out towards one house situated on the road of Village Karisinghi and told that it is house of one person, whose name he does not remember and the informer further told that son-in-law of the owner of the said house is residing there for last few days in the said house. Thereafter, informer left the spot. ASI of local police also left the spot stating that he is having some urgent official work.
It is stated by him that ASI Netrapal requested 3-4 public persons to join the investigation, but none agreed to join the investigation and left without disclosing their names and addresses while seeking their personal DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 60 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act excuses. No notice could be served upon them due to paucity of time.
It is stated by him that after some time one person aged about 30 years came out from the said house and his physical appearance was matching with what was told by the secret informer to them. They apprehended that person. ASI Netrapal disclosed their identity to that person and has also shown his ID Card to the said Rajender Kumar Nayak. Accused disclosed his name as Rajender Kumar Nayak (witness has correctly identified the accused). ASI Netrapal also apprised him about the facts of the present case.
It is stated by him that ASI Netrapal prepared notice U/s 50 NDPS Act in duplicate using carbon paper. He told the accused that they have information that he may be in possession of contraband and for this purpose they have to take his search. ASI Netrapal apprised the accused that he has a legal right that if he want, he can be searched in the presence of Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate and also explained meaning of Gazetted Officer and Magistrate in vernacular to the accused, however accused told that he can read Hindi, but cannot write it and he refused to get himself searched in the presence of any Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate as well as to take search of the raiding team members. ASI Netrapal handed over original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act to the accused. Thereafter, the said denial of accused was noted down by ASI Netrapal in his handwriting on the carbon copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act. The refusal of the accused was read over to the accused and he signed on the same. The carbon copy of the notice U/s 50 NDPS Act is Ex. PW-20/M bearing carbon impression of signature of this witness at Point-A, signatures of accused as receipt at Point-B, refusal of accused from Points X to X1, signatures of DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 61 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act accused below his refusal at Points C and C1 and signatures of this witness below the refusal at Point-A1.
It is stated by him that ASI Netrapal took the cursory search of accused, but no contraband was found, therefore ASI Netrapal prepared nil recovery memo which is Ex. PW-20/N which bears his signature at Point-A. It is stated by him that ASI Netrapal arrested the accused Rajender Kumar Nayak vide arrest memo Ex. PW-20/O and personally searched him vide personal search memo Ex. PW-20/P which bears signature of this witness at Point-A, respectively. In the personal search of accused original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act, copy of Aadhaar Card and Rs. 300/- were recovered. ASI Netrapal recorded disclosure statement of the accused Ex. PW-20/Q which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. After medical examination of the accused, he was taken to P.S. Bugoda where he was lodged in the lock-up.
It is stated by him that on 02.04.2023 on the directions of ASI Netrapal, this witness went to P.S. Polasara District Ganjam, Orissa having jurisdiction of the area i.e. Village Bakisahi, Poundripuda, P.S. Polasara, District Ganjam, Orissa in which house of accused Rajender Kumar was situated for verification of parcha 12. This witness got the parcha 12 of the accused verified from there, obtained the copy of report from P.S. Polasara and came back to P.S. Bugoda and handed over the report to ASI Netrapal.
Thereafter, the accused was taken to Bhuvneshwar Railway Station by bus, from where they boarded the train for Delhi and reached Delhi on 04.04.2023 and ASI Netrapal handed over custody of accused Rajender Kumar to SI Monu Chauhan.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 62 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan obtained two days PC remand of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak. During his PC remand, accused disclosed that he can get recovered the GPS installed in the Innova car in which the contraband was recovered from the possession of accused Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi. SI Monu Chauhan recorded his supplementary statement which is Ex. PW-20/R which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 06.04.2023 this witness alongwith SI Monu Chauhan, HC Prince and accused Rajender Kumar Nayak who was on PC went to Crime Branch, Pushp Vihar where they met HC Rakesh Kumar, MHC(M) and apprised him about the facts of the present case and also told him that as per accused Rajender one GPS was installed in the Innova car recovered from accused Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi and they have to get the same recovered at the instance of accused. HC Rakesh informed that although as per maalkhana register the aforementioned car was deposited at the maalkhana of P.S. Crime branch, Pushp Vihar, however due to lack of space, it is now parked in the office of ER-II, Crime Branch, P.S. Krishna Nagar and that the ignition key of the car was deposited at the maalkhana of P.S. Crime Branch. SI Monu Chauhan got their arrival entry register at P.S. Crime Branch in CCTNS. Thereafter, they alongwith HC Rakesh, came back to their office i.e. ER-II, Crime Branch, P.S. Krishna Nagar after medical examination of the accused. Accused Rajender Kumar identified the Innova car bearing no. AP 35H 3939 parked in the premises of their office. With the help of ignition key of the car brought by HC Rakesh, the door beside the driver seat was opened and accused Rajender pointed out below the steering of the car where there was a plastic DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 63 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act cover near the steering rod and told that the GPS is installed there. SI Monu Chauhan took out the plastic cover, which was found containing one black colour GPS which was affixed there with the help of a connector and on the GPS details such as GPS tracker, IMEI number, input voltage-9v-90v was written and there was a yellow colour mark of flying eagle. There was also one bar code on the GPS. SI Monu Chauhan took out the GPS, opened the same and it was found loaded with one SIM Card of Airtel. SI Monu Chauhan kept the GPS instrument into a white colour envelope and sealed the same with the seal of MC and prepared seizure memo Ex. PW-20/S which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. SI Monu Chauhan handed over the sealed parcel alongwith copy of seizure memo to this witness to be deposited in the maalkhana of P.S. Crime Branch. This witness went to the maalkhana of P.S. Crime Branch where he deposited the sealed parcel with MHC(M) HC Rakesh. The original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Devender @ Shatrughan recovered from his personal search bears signature of this witness at Point-B. The case properties have already been exhibited during the testimony of earlier witnesses. The Ld. Defence Counsel does not oppose the same. Hence, the production of the case property is dispensed with.
The original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act in the name of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak already Ex. PW-30/B bears signature of this witness at Point-B. This witness thoroughly cross-examination on behalf of accused persons. Further, during his cross-examination on behalf of accused persons, a specific question was put to him that is it correct to say that if someone wants to DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 64 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act go to Seemapuri area from Apsara border, than he may take route from Kallander Colony also without going towards J&K Pocket road, to which it is replied by him that though there is a way, but it is very long and congested.
An another question was put to this witness whether he has mentioned in his statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. that informer had informed ASI Rambir that the accused persons would come from Apsara border through underpass and would go towards J&K Pocket to reach Seemapuri. After going through his statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C., it is admitted by this witness that it is not so mentioned.
It is stated by him that the white plastic sacks were still in the car used by the accused persons when ACP Raj Kumar Saha reached the spot. It is stated by him that the plastic sacks were removed from the car in front of ACP Raj Kumar Saha and the same were checked by ASI Rambir in presence of ACP Raj Kumar Saha. It is stated by him that Red Cross Hospital was not visible from the place of apprehension of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi. It is stated by him that there is a curve on the road for going towards the place of apprehension from Red Cross Hospital. It is stated by him that Red Cross Hospital was situated at a distance of about 300-400 meters from the place of apprehension of accused persons. It is stated by him that the accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi were apprehended after crossing the second gate of J&K Pocket colony. It is stated by him that the second gate is the main gate of J&K Pocket colony from where persons enter and exits in J&K Pocket. It is stated by him that the place of apprehension of accused persons was about 30-40 steps from the main gate of J&K Pocket. It is DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 65 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act admitted by him that J&K Pocket is a residential area. It is admitted by him that no efforts were made by ASI Rambir to call any public witness from J&K Pocket area or from Red Cross Hospital or from Dilshad Garden Metro Station or from the CNG pump, to join the investigation.
25. PW-21 Smt. Pratima Tirki deposed that her husband used to ply tractor in the village. At present, he left her. Her son Ajay used to work in Raigarh. She has two daughters namely Deepika Tirki and Anamika Tirki. Her daughter Deepika Tirki is married. Her daughter Deepika Tirki used to live in Ghaziabad alongwith her husband namely Negi. Her younger daughter Anamika is unmarried and used to live with her. About 7-8 years back, she came to meet her daughter Deepika at her rented premises at Ghaziabad. As she need a job, her son-in-law Negi introduced her to accused Devender (correctly identified by this witness in the Court). Accused Devender used to reside at some place near Noida. She joined as a housemaid in his house and he used to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month as salary. She worked there for about two months. On the asking of accused Devender, she got issued one SIM Card of Airtel on her ID. Accused Devender brought the said SIM from the company. She does not remember the mobile number of the SIM. Accused Devender was using the aforementioned SIM in his mobile. After two months, she came back to her village at Raigarh. She never talked to accused Devender on the said number from Raigarh.
During her cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, it is stated by her that probably it is correct that accused Devender also obtained her photograph when he went to get the SIM issued in her name.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 66 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act This witness was shown CAF of mobile number 8800146356 and was questioned regarding whose photograph is there on the said CAF. The witness states that the photograph on the CAF (Mark 21A) is her photograph at Point-X. It is admitted by her that H.No. 144/8 which is mentioned on the CAF is house number of her residence at Raigarh. She cannot admit or deny if the mobile number of the SIM which was got issued by accused Devender in her name was 8800146356. Vol. as she never used the same. It is admitted by her that she was arrested in a case of NDPS Act and was lodged at Korpur Jail, Orissa after she came back to Raigarh and went to Orissa alongwith her relative. She does not remember the mobile number used by her in her mobile phone, while she was working as housemaid in the house of accused Devender.
It is denied by her that she intentionally suppressing the mobile number of SIM Card which the accused Devender got issued in her name.
26. PW-22 Ct. Manish Maan deposed that on 21.02.2023, he was posted at ER-II, Crime Branch, Delhi as Constable. On that day, IO SI Monu Chauhan handed over forwarding letter for FSL to this witness and on his direction, this witness obtained one sealed parcel sealed with the seal of MC from MHC(M) vide RC No. 124/21/23. This witness deposited the parcel at FSL, Rohini, Delhi, came to back to Police Station and deposited the receipt of FSL with MHC(M). It is stated by him that till the time the case property was in his possession, it has not been tampered with. The copy of RC is Mark 22A which bears his signature at Point-A. Receipt of FSL is Mark 22B which bears DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 67 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act his signature at Point-A.
27. PW-23 Sh. G. Koteswra Rao, Administrative Officer deposed that he has been deputed by Ms. G. Vimla, Regional Transport Office of Deputy Transport Commissioner, Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh to produce the required document before the Court vide her authority letter Ex. PW-23/A bearing her signatures at Point-A. This witness has brought the print out of the registration details of vehicle bearing no. AP-35H-3939 retrieved from their system. As per record the said vehicle was initially registered in the name of Mohd. Jafar Ali in the year 2008 and thereafter was transferred in the name of Srinivasa Rao on 03.05.2016, thereafter it was transferred in the name of Srinu on 06.11.2017, thereafter it was transferred in the name of Rajender Kumar Naik on 20.10.2021, resident of Quarter No. 437/F, Sector-3, Ukkunagaram, Vishakhapatnam Rural, Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. The vehicle was of Toyota Innova bearing Engine No. 2KD6077914 and Chassis No. MBJ11JV4007126020. The print out retrieved from the system is Ex. PW-23/B (running into five pages) bearing signatures of Ms. G. Vimla at Point-A.
28. PW-24 Ms. Pinki deposed that accused Azad @ Rakal is her husband. It was her second marriage with Azad @ Rakal. She has two sons namely Sabir and Sameer from her first marriage. She does not carry any mobile phone. Her sons Sabir and Sameer are having mobile phones, but she does not know their mobile numbers. She does not know the mobile number of DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 68 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act her husband accused Azad @ Rakal.
During her cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, she could not tell whether her son Sabir was using mobile no. 9953337686. It is denied by her that she was using mobile nos. 9354626310 and 7836024335. It is stated by her that she is illiterate, but she can sign. It is denied by her that she has stated to the police that she use to talk to her husband Azad @ Rakal on his mobile numbers 8882932251 and 9354822010 from mobile nos. 9354626310, 9953337686 and 7836024335. She was confronted with the statement Ex. PW- 24/A where it is so recorded. It is denied by her that she is suppressing these facts in order to save her husband Azad @ Rakal from conviction.
29. PW-25 HC Rakesh Kumar deposed that on 16.12.2022, he was working as MHC(M) at P.S. Crime Branch. On that day on the directions of IO, he handed over seven sealed parcels Mark A1, B1, C1, D1, E1, X1 and Y1 alongwith sample seals to HC Rajiv vide RC No. 852/21/22 and four sealed parcels alongwith sample seal to HC Rajiv vide RC No. 851/21/22 to be deposited at FSL, Rohini, Delhi. This witness also made entry no. 5965 in register no. 19 encircled as Y and also in entry no. 5982 at point encircled as Y. He also made entry in register no. 19 vide sl. no. 6093 encircled at Point-Y, sl. no. 6094 encircled at Point-Y, sl. no. 6095 encircled at Point-Z and sl. no. 6096 encircled at Point-Y. After depositing the same, HC Rajiv came back and handed over acknowledgments of FSL to this witness.
It is stated by him that the copy of RC No. 852/21/22 already Ex.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 69 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act PW-20/I bears his signature at Point-B and acknowledgment of FSL already Ex. PW-20/J. Copy of RC No. 851/21/22 already Ex. PW-20/K bears his signatures at Point-B and copy of acknowledgment of FSL already Ex. PW-20/L. It is stated by him that on 21.02.2023, he handed over one sealed parcel alongwith sample seal to Ct. Manish on the directions of IO to be deposited at FSL vide RC No. 124/21/23. This witness made entry in register no. 19 vide sl. no. 5765 at point encircled as Y. After depositing the same, Ct. Manish came back and handed over acknowledgments of FSL to this witness. The copy of RC No. 124/21/23 already Mark 22A is Ex. PW-25/A bears his signature at Point-B and copy of acknowledgment of FSL already Mark 22B is Ex. PW-25/B. It is stated by him that on 04.04.2023, personal search articles of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak were deposited at maalkhana. This witness made entry in register no. 19 vide sl. no. 6496, copy of which is Ex. PW-25/C. It is stated by him that on 06.04.2023, IO alongwith one or two staff members alongwith accused Rajender Kumar Nayak came to the maalkhana of P.S. Crime Branch and inquired about the seized vehicle in the present case. After verifying from register no. 19, this witness told him (IO) that the said vehicle is parked at ER-II, Crime Branch, P.S. Krishna Nagar due to shortage of space in the maalkhana of P.S. Crime Branch, however the key of the said vehicle was available at the maalkhana. This witness accompanied them back to the office of ER-II, Crime Branch alongwith ignition key of the car. The aforementioned car, registration number of which he does not remember but it was Innova car, was found stationed at the said office. One GPS was found DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 70 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act installed beside the driver seat of the car. It was taken out and was taken into possession by the IO vide seizure memo already Ex. PW-20/S bearing signature of this witness at Point-B. This witness correctly identified accused Rajender Kumar Nayak in the Court.
It is stated by him that till the time the case property was in his possession, it has not been tampered with.
MHC(M) has produced one sealed envelope sealed with the seal of MC. Same was opened. It was found containing one electronic plastic instrument attached with a cord, loaded with one SIM Card of AIRTEL and a sticker on which GPS Tracker IMEI : 356218600021891 and input voltage :
9V-90V was printed, was affixed on the said electronic plastic instrument. Witness stated that it is the same GPS which was recovered from Innova car parked at the office of ER-II, Crime Branch, Krishna Nagar, Delhi.
30. PW-26 Inspector Ranvir Singh deposed that on 22.11.2022, he was posted at P.S. Crime Branch as SHO. On that day in the morning hours at about 10:25 am, HC Mohit came to office of this witness and handed over to him three sealed parcels sealed with the seal of 'MC' and having Mark X, Y and Z alongwith carbon copies of seizure memos. This witness affixed his seal on the said three parcels with his seal of RS. He also signed all the three parcels and copies of seizure memos.
This witness then called the MHC(M) CP alongwith register no. 19 in his office and MHC(M) has made entry of all the details in the register no. 19 DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 71 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act and this witness handed over sealed parcels and all documents to MHC(M) CP. This witness also signed at Point-A against the relevant entry in register no. 19 which is already Ex. PW-18/F. In this regard, this witness lodged a GD vide no. 36A at about 10:41 am dated 22.11.2022 and same is Ex. PW-26/A which bears his signatures at Point-A. During his cross-examination on behalf of accused Azad @ Rakal, it is admitted by him that on 20.11.2022 he was posted as SHO, P.S. Crime Branch, but he was on leave. It is stated by him that he was carrying seal of RS with him on that day. It is again stated by him that probably his seal of RS was in the drawer of his office. It is stated by him that there was a lock in the drawer of the table, but probably the lock might have been left open. It is stated by him that nobody can use his seal without asking him in written or via oral permission. He failed to remember if his seal of RS was used by anyone else in the present case or in any other case without his permission. He failed to remember if in the present case at any point of time anybody asked him for his permission to use his seal of RS. He could not tell to whom seal of MC belongs, though it is stated by him that the parcels which were sent to him by SI Monu Chauhan were sealed with the seal of MC. It is stated by him that he does not know which seal Inspector Gobind Chauhan uses. It is stated by him that he has not prepared any inventory regarding the case properties deposited on 20.11.2022. It is stated by him that the entry in register no.19 was made by MHC(M) on 22.11.2022 regarding depositing of three parcels in his presence, though it is admitted by him that in column no.4 of the said entry, it is not mentioned that he has put his counter-seal of RS on the parcels. It is stated by DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 72 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act him that on 20.11.2022 he had no talks with Inspector Gobind Chauhan regarding the present case. He could not tell if anybody else in his office also used to use similar seal with the initials of RS or not, apart from him. It is stated by him that when he joined his office after his leave, he has received no document that his seal of RS was also used by someone in his absence.
31. PW-27 Inspector Govind Chauhan deposed that on 20.11.2022, he was looking after the work of SHO, P.S. Crime Branch as SHO Inspector Ranvir Singh was on leave. On that day in the morning hours at about 5:20 am, HC Mohit came to office of this witness and handed over to him five sealed parcels sealed with the seal of 'RS' and having Mark A, B, C, D and E alongwith copy of seizure memo. This witness affixed counter seal on the said parcels with his seal of RS. He also signed all the five parcels and copy of seizure memo. After confirming the FIR number from the Duty Officer he wrote down the same on parcels as well as on seizure memo. He then called the MHC(M) CP ASI Mukesh alongwith register no. 19 in his office and MHC(M) has made entry of all the details in the register no. 19 and this witness handed over sealed parcels and copy of seizure memo to MHC(M) CP. This witness also signed at Point-A against the relevant entry in register no. 19 which is already Ex. PW-18/A. In this regard, this witness lodged a GD vide no. 10A at about 6:16 am dated 20.11.2022 and same is Ex. PW-27/A which bears his signatures at Point-A. During his cross-examination on behalf of accused Azad @ Rakal, it is stated by him that when he received the five parcels on 20.11.2022, there DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 73 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act was no seal of MC on the parcels. It is stated by him that he has also used seal of RS in other cases also, but he failed to remember the number of other cases in which he used the seal of RS. It is stated by him that apart from seal of RS, he has also used seal of GS in other cases. It is stated by him that he was never officially intimated to his department that he is using seals of RS, GS or GC. It is stated by him that the aforementioned seals were not issued by the department and he got the same prepared personally. On a Court question being put to him that why did he get prepared personally three seals of three different initials, it is replied by him that the said seals were used by him during different period of the tenure of his service. It is stated by him that he used the seals of GS and GC as his full name is Gobind Singh Chauhan. It is stated by him that initial RS was used randomly and not because of any specific reason. It is stated by him that ASI Mukesh made entry in register no.19 in his presence. It is admitted by him that in column no.4 of the said entry, it is not mentioned that he counter-sealed the parcels with his seal of RS. It is stated by him that he did not hand over his seal of RS to anybody else on 20.11.2022 after use. It is stated by him that apart from DD No. 10A he has not prepared any separate inventory regarding the sealed parcels.
32. PW-28 Sh. Sabir deposed that name of his mother is Pinki. Accused Azad @ Rakal is his step father who is second husband of his mother Pinki. In the year 2022, this witness used to reside with his mother Pinki and accused Azad @ Rakal at D-124, New Seemapuri, Delhi. During that period this witness was the wholesaler of cold drinks and water. At that time, he was DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 74 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act using mobile number 9354626310. He has brought his mobile phone. He does not remember as to which mobile numbers his mother was using. He does not know as to which mobile numbers Azad @ Rakal was using.
During his cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the State, he could not admit or deny if his mother Pinki was using mobile numbers 9953337686 and 7836024335. It is voluntarily stated by him that her (his mother's) mobile numbers were not feed in his mobile phone. He could not admit or deny if accused Azad @ Rakal was using mobile numbers 8882932251 and 9354822010. It is voluntarily stated by him that his (accused Azad @ Rakal's) mobile numbers were not feed in his mobile phone. It is denied by him that he used to talk Azad @ Rakal from his mobile phone on aforementioned numbers of accused Azad @ Rakal. A question was put to him by Ld. Addl. PP for the State if he has saved any mobile number in his contact list as used by his mother, to which it is replied by him that he has not saved any number of his mother in mobile phone which he brought and in contact list also there is no name of his mother.
It is denied by him that although he has brought his mobile phone, but he has intentionally deleted the mobile numbers of his mother Pinki and Azad @ Rakal from his mobile phone.
A question was put to him by the Court if presently he has saved the mobile number of his mother Pinki or step father Azad @ Rakal in his mobile phone, to which he replied in negative.
A question was put to him by the Court that could he tell the reasons for the same, to which it is replied by him that the reason is that his DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 75 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act mother had done second marriage and thereafter, he was not in contact with her.
33. PW-29 Inspector Ashish Dahima deposed that on 19.11.2022 he was posted as Inspector Incharge ER-II, Crime Branch at P.S. Krishna Nagar. On that day, on his directions a team comprising of ASI Rambir, HC Rajeev, HC Prince, HC Mohit and W/HC Pooja was constituted and they left their office for collecting and developing information regarding drug peddler. They also took laptop, UPS, IO bag, electronic weighing machine etc. alongwith them. They left their office vide DD No. 133A in private Ecco car bearing no. DL 12CB 3654 which was being driven by HC Mohit.
It is stated by him that at about 10:05 pm, ASI Rambir telephonically informed this witness that he received a telephonic information near Red Cross Hospital, Dilshad Garden that two persons namely Noor Mohd. & Ujjwal and one lady namely Laxmi are coming in a silver colour Innova car bearing no. AP-35H-3939 from Andhra Pradesh alongwith ganja and will come between 10:30 pm to 11:00 pm to give delivery of the ganja to one person namely Rakal in new Seemapuri area and can be apprehended, if raided. This witness also personally talked to secret informer and satisfied himself from the information.
It is stated by him that he telephonically informed ACP ER-II, Sh. Raj Kumar Saha about the secret information, who directed him to take immediate action. This witness thereafter called ASI Rambir and directed him to take appropriate legal action alongwith the raiding team members.
It is stated by him that he lodged the secret information in CCTNS DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 76 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act vide DD No. 143A which is already Ex. PW-15/B bearing his signature at Point-B and forwarded the same to the office of ACP.
It is stated by him that on 20.11.2022 one report U/s 57 NDPS Act prepared by ASI Rambir regarding recovery of contraband and one report U/s 57 NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan regarding arrest of accused Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi were placed before this witness. This witness forwarded the same to the office of ACP ER-II. The reports already Ex. PW- 15/C and Ex. PW-15/D bear signature of this witness at Point-C, respectively.
It is stated by him that on 22.11.2022, SI Monu Chauhan came to office of this witness and briefed him about the present case and thereafter ACP ER-II constituted a raiding team comprising of this witness, SI Monu Chauhan, HC Mohit, HC Prince, HC Rajeev and W/HC Pooja under supervision of this witness. SI Monu Chauhan also obtained search warrant from the ACP. They left their office in Ecco Sports car bearing no. DL 12CB 3654 being driven by HC Mohit. They were carrying IO kit and electronic weighing machine. They also took one more private car make Duster bearing no. UK 17A 2800. Accused Noor Mohd. was accompanying them. They left their office at about 4:50 am vide DD No. 1A.
It is stated by him that they took route through nala road, above Shahdara flyover, passed GTB Hospital and reached DLF Mor, new Seemapuri where accused Noor Mohd. identified the locality. Thereafter, accused Noor Mohd. led them from 70 Foota Road, passed in front of Nisaria Masjid and took them to D-Block where HC Mohit parked the Ecco Sports car near Anganwadi and park. SI Monu Chauhan requested 2-3 public persons to join the raiding DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 77 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act team, but none agreed to join the investigation on hearing name of Azad @ Rakal being scared from him and left without disclosing their names and addresses while seeking their personal excuses. No notice could be served upon them due to paucity of time.
It is stated by him that he also surveyed the locality where, there were small houses and constructed upto four floors and it was dense residential area. On inspecting the situation, he called at his office and asked SI Shailender to come at the spot alongwith other staff. SI Shailender reached the spot in a silver colour venue car alongwith HC Harshit, HC Manish, HC Sudhir and ASI Raj Singh. Custody of accused Noor Mohd. was handed over to ASI Raj Singh. Accused Noor Mohd. further led them in a gali beside the park and Anganwadi and pointed out towards one house on which tiles were affixed on the outer wall and the gates and windows were made up of steel and identified the house as belonging to accused Azad @ Rakal. HC Prince and HC Mohit knocked the gate of the house and rest of the staff covered the house so that the alleged person namely Azad @ Rakal could not escape. Despite knocking for sometime the gate was not opened from inside. Some neighbours including gents and ladies gathered in the gali and asked them as to why police came there. On judging that they were trying to open the gate of house of accused Azad @ Rakal, they opposed the police proceedings stating themselves to be distant relative of accused Azad @ Rakal. This witness pacified them and asked them to join the police proceeding, but some of them refused to join the proceeding stating that they are distant relatives of accused Azad @ Rakaal and some of them told that they are afraid of Azad @ Rakal since he is known criminal of DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 78 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act the area, involved in many criminal cases and can kill their children. None of them disclosed their names and refused to take the notice. Number of house of accused Azad @ Rakal was found to be D-124. Lights were on inside the house and there were sounds of some movement seen inside the house. HC Mohit managed to open the steel gate of the house which was having automatic lock and thereafter, SI Monu Chauhan and other staff went inside the house. After some time SI Monu Chauhan called this witness inside the house where one person whose identity this witness came to know as Azad @ Rakal was present.
This witness correctly identified accused Azad @ Rakal in the Court proceedings.
It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan has already recovered one heavy plastic katta which was found containing ganja as per its smell and physical characteristics. Some small polythene pouches containing ganja stapled with stapler pin were also recovered. One stapler, three packets of stapler pins and some empty polythene pouches were also recovered. This witness instructed SI Monu Chauhan to seize the recovered properties as per legal procedure and thereafter this witness came out of the house. Thereafter, SI Monu Chauhan sent HC Mohit alongwith parcels of recovered case properties to P.S. Crime Branch, Pushp Vihar.
It is stated by him that SI Monu Chauhan arrested the accused Azad @ Rakal. Thereafter, this witness came back to his office. On the same day, he received one report U/s 57 NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan regarding seizure of contraband and arrest of the accused and this witness forwarded to ACP ER-II. The report already Ex. PW-15/F bears signature of this witness at DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 79 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Point-B. It is stated by him that on 05.01.2023 report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding arrest of accused Farukh (since discharged) prepared by SI Monu Chauhan was placed before this witness and this witness forwarded the same to ACP ER-II. The report already Ex. PW-15/H bears his signature at Point-B. It is stated by him that on 14.03.2023 report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding arrest of accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey prepared by SI Monu Chauhan was placed before this witness and he forwarded the same to ACP ER-II. The report already Ex. PW-15/J bears his signature at Point-B. It is stated by him that on 01.04.2023 ASI Netrapal who was out of station sent one report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding arrest of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak on whatsapp of this witness. This witness took print out of the report and forwarded the same to ACP ER-II. The report already Ex. PW-15/L bears signature of this witness at Point-B. During his cross-examination on behalf of accused Azad @ Rakal, it is stated by him that he had forwarded only one document as per Section 42 NDPS Act in the present case i.e. DD No. 143A. It is stated by him that he had talked to ASI Rambir on 19.11.2022 for about 1½ to 02 minutes. It is stated by him that during this period, he also talked to secret informer. He failed to remember if he ever came across any paper on which ASI Rambir has recorded secret information. It is stated by him that he personally lodged DD No. 143A. He failed to remember as to after how much time of receiving information from ASI Rambir, he uploaded DD No. 143A in CCTNS. It is voluntarily stated by him that the same is reflected in DD No. 143A. It is stated by him that ASI DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 80 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Rambir informed him that accused persons will be coming from the side of Apsara border and will go towards New Seemapuri. It is stated by him that it was not informed to him by the secret informer that the accused persons will pass through J&K Pocket gate.
34. PW-30 HC Prince deposed that on 19.11.2022, he was posted at ER-II, Crime Branch, Krishna Nagar, Delhi as HC. Their office was situated in the premises of P.S. Krishna Nagar. On that day, he alongwith ASI Rambir, HC Mohit, HC Rajeev and W/HC Pooja left their office at about 8:15 pm vide DD No. 133A recorded at 8:13 pm for developing and collecting information about drug peddlers and drug suppliers in Shahdara District area in private Ecco Sports car of white colour bearing no. DL 12-CB-3654.
He deposed on the same lines as deposed by PW-1 HC Mohit Kumar, PW-6 ASI Rambir Singh and PW-20 HC Rajeev on all other aspects.
It is stated by him that ASI Rambir prepared separate notices U/s 50 NDPS Act in the name of the respective accused persons in duplicate by typing the same on laptop and taking the print out on the printer. The same were read over to the respective accused persons.
It is stated by him that upon opening the kattas recovered during search of the car of accused persons, they were found containing vegetative material which appeared to be ganja from its smell and physical appearance.
It is stated by him that on 21.11.2022 PC remand of accused Noor Mohd. was obtained and accused persons namely Ujjwal and Laxmi were sent to J/C. During PC remand accused Noor Mohd. made supplementary disclosure DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 81 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act on interrogation and SI Monu Chauhan recorded his disclosure statement which is Ex. PW-30/A which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 22.11.2022, on the directions of ACP, a raiding team comprising of himself, SI Monu Chauhan, HC Rajeev, HC Mohit and W/HC Pooja being headed by Inspector Ashish Dahima was constituted for search of accused Azad @ Rakal at the instance of accused Noor Mohd.
It is stated by him that they left their office alongwith accused Noor Mohd. at about 4:50 am vide GD No. 1A in Ecco Sports car bearing registration number DL-12CB-3654 which was being driven by HC Mohit for the investigation of the present case. IO/ SI Monu Chauhan carried IO kit and electronic weighing machine with him in the car. They also took one more private car make Duster, number of which he does not remember.
It is stated by him that they have inspected the locality and found that it was densely populated area having small houses mostly built-up up to four storeys. Inspector Ashish Dahima considering the situation and telephonically called SI Shailender and other staff of ER-II Crime Branch to the spot. After some time, SI Shailender, HC Harshit, HC Manish, HC Sudhir and ASI Raj Singh came at the spot in a Silver colour Venue car, registration number of which, he does not remember.
It is stated by him that custody of accused Noor Mohmmad was handed over to ASI Raj Singh. Thereafter, accused Noor Mohmmad led them to a gali beside Anganwadi Kendra and reached one house, on the wall of which tiles were affixed. The main gate, small gate for staircase and window of the said house were made up of steel. Accused Noor Mohammad pointed out DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 82 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act towards the said house and told that it belongs to Azad @ Rakal.
It is stated by him that the contents of the notice U/s 50 NDPS Act were read over to accused Azad @ Rakal. Accused Azad @ Rakal signed on the carbon copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act as receipt of original notice.
It is stated by him that accused Azad @ Rakal was left in his custody and this witness alongwith accused remained at the ground floor and SI Monu Chauhan, HC Mohit, HC Rajeev and W/HC Pooja went upstairs for searching first floor, second floor and third floor. After some time HC Mohit, HC Rajeev, W/HC Pooja and SI Monu Chauhan came down to ground floor. On the directions of SI Monu Chauhan, W/HC Pooja went outside the house in the gali. SI Monu Chauhan called Inspector Ashish Dahima inside the ground floor.
It is stated by him that accused Azad @ Rakal got recovered one white colour heavy plastic katta and some stapled polythene pouches containing ganja which were kept behind the sofa lying in the hall of ground floor. There were total 42 small pouches filled with ganja which was visible. SI Monu Chauhan opened and checked the contents of plastic katta and of small pouches, which were found containing vegetative material, which appeared to be ganja from its physical appearance and smell.
This witness deposed on the same lines as deposed by PW-20 HC Rajeev qua investigation conducted on 04.01.2023 and 12.03.2023 & 13.03.2023 being part of the raiding team.
It is stated by him qua investigation conducted on 12.03.2023 that SI Monu Chauhan handed over original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act to the accused and accused Devender signed the copy of notice as receipt of original notice.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 83 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Contents of the notice were read over to accused.
This witness deposed on the same lines as deposed by PW-20 HC Rajeev almost on all the aspects qua proceedings conducted against accused Rajender Kumar Nayak.
It is further stated by him that ASI Netrapal got recorded their arrival entry in the local P.S. One ASI from the local Police Station, whose name this witness does not remember exactly joined their team. Probably his name was ASI Sulabh.
It is further stated by him that ASI of local police called his informer at Village Karisinghi, apprised him about the facts and the name of accused Rajender Singh Nayak. The informer pointed out towards one house situated on the road of Village Karisinghi and told that it is house of one person, whose title is Behra and the informer further told that son-in-law of the owner of the said house is residing there for last few days in the said house. Thereafter, informer left the spot. ASI of local police also left the spot stating that he is having some urgent official work.
It is further stated by him that ASI Netrapal handed over original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act to the accused and accused signed on the copy of the same as receipt of original notice.
It is stated by him that the original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Devender @ Shatrughan recovered from his personal search already Ex. PW-1/Z4 bears his (this witness's) signature at Point-C. MHC(M) produced original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act in the name of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak. Same was taken on record.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 84 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act The original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Rajender Kumar Nayak recovered from his personal search is Ex. PW-30/B bearing his signature at Point-A. MHC(M) produced one sealed parcel sealed with the seal of Court. Same was opened. It was found containing one electronic plastic instrument attached with a cord, loaded with one SIM Card of AIRTEL and a sticker on which GPS Tracker IMEI : 356218600021891 and input voltage : 9V-90V is printed is affixed on the said electronic plastic instrument. Witness stated that it was the same GPS which was recovered from Innova car parked at the office of ER-II, Crime Branch, Krishna Nagar, Delhi. The instrument is Ex. P-1.
MHC(M) produced one sealed envelope sealed with the seals of MC & RS. Same was opened. It was found containing 42 empty polythene pouches on which open stapler pins were seen to be affixed on each of the pouches. Witness identified the same as the pouches recovered from the house of Azad @ Rakal in which ganja was filled and was subsequently emptied into a plastic box. The pouches are Ex. P-2 (Colly).
MHC(M) produced another sealed envelope sealed with the seal of MC. Same was opened. It was found containing one stapler on which Kangaroo is printed, three boxes of stapler pins on which Kangaroo is printed and 415 empty small polythene pouches. Witness identified the same as the articles recovered from the house of Azad @ Rakal lying on the floor. All the articles are Ex. P-3 (Colly).
The identity of the Innova car recovered from possession of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi, not disputed by Ld. DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 85 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Counsel for accused persons.
It is stated by him that the sampling proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act of the contraband has already been conducted before Ld. MM. Production of case properties was therefore dispensed with.
During his cross-examination on behalf of accused persons, it is admitted by him that the movement of the suspected car of accused persons was not videographed. It is stated by him that one can also go to New Seemapuri through Kallander Colony.
35. PW-31 Dr. Adesh Kumar, Senior Scientific Officer, Chemistry, FSL, Rohini, Delhi deposed that he is working at FSL, Rohini since 1999. On 16.12.2022, he was posted as Sr. Scientific Officer (Chemistry) at FSL, Rohini. On that day, seven sealed parcels Mark X1, Y1, A1, B1, C1, D1 and E1 each sealed with one seal of BA in FIR No. 270/2022 dated 20.11.2022, U/s 20/25/29 NDPS Act, P.S. Crime Branch alongwith specimen seal, forwarding letter, copy of FIR, copy of seizure memo etc. were received in their office from ACP, Eastern Range-III, Crime Branch, Delhi vide letter reference no. 1341/ACP/Eastern Range-III/Crime Branch dated 16.12.2022. Same were marked to this witness for chemical examination. The seals were intact and were tallying with specimen seal.
It is stated by him that on opening the parcel Mark X1, it was found containing dried greenish brown coloured flowering and fruiting vegetative material, weight approx. 50.3 gms and it was mark as Ex. X1.
It is stated by him that on opening the parcel Mark Y1, it was found DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 86 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act containing dried greenish brown coloured flowering and fruiting vegetative material, weight approx. 29.6 gms and it was mark as Ex. Y1.
It is stated by him that on opening the parcel Mark A1, it was found containing dried greenish brown coloured flowering and fruiting vegetative material, weight approx. 49.9 gms and it was mark as Ex. A1.
It is stated by him that on opening the parcel Mark B1, it was found containing dried greenish brown coloured flowering and fruiting vegetative material, weight approx. 49.9 gms and it was mark as Ex. B1.
It is stated by him that on opening the parcel Mark C1, it was found containing dried greenish brown coloured flowering and fruiting vegetative material, weight approx. 50.1 gms and it was mark as Ex. C1.
It is stated by him that on opening the parcel Mark D1, it was found containing dried greenish brown coloured flowering and fruiting vegetative material, weight approx. 49.3 gms and it was mark as Ex. D1.
It is stated by him that on opening the parcel Mark E1, it was found containing dried greenish brown coloured flowering and fruiting vegetative material, weight approx. 50.8 gms and it was mark as Ex. E1.
It is stated by him that he analyzed the exhibit between 06.01.2023 to 24.07.2023.
It is stated by him that on physical microscopic, chemical and TLC examination X1, Y1, A1, B1, C1, D1 and E1 were found to be ganja (cannabis).
It is stated by him that after the examination the remnants of the exhibit was kept in separate parcel which was sealed with the seal of AY FSL DELHI. He prepared the detailed report bearing no. SFSL DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 87 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act DLH/15805/CHEM/5564/22 dated 24.07.2023 which is Ex. PW-31/A (running into two pages) bearing his signature at Points A and B. He submitted his report in a sealed envelope alongwith the sealed parcels for onward transmissions to the forwarding agency.
During his cross-examination on behalf of accused persons, it is stated by him that he has conducted Fast Blue B Test and Duquenois-Levine Test on the contraband. It is stated by him that both the tests are conducted to detect the presence of cannabinoids. On a question put to him, it is admitted by him that cannabinoids are found in ganja, bhaang and charas in different ration and percentage. It is admitted by him that the three cannabinoids i.e. THC, CBN and CBD are also found in ganja, bhaang and charas in different ratio and percentage. It is admitted by him that botanical/ generic name of bhaang and ganja plant is cannabis sativa. It is voluntarily stated by him that morphologically ganja is the flowering, fruiting tops of the female plant, whereas bhaang does not have flowering, fruiting parts. It is further stated by him that morphologically on microscopic examination systolic and glandular hairs were specially found in ganja and not in bhaang. It is denied by him that systolic and glandular hairs are also found in bhaang plant, but their ration is comparatively less to the ganja plant. He failed to remember the exact names of the chemicals which were used by him for performing Duquenois-Levine Test. It is stated by him that in case the percentage of cannbinoids is more in bhaang plant equal as that to ganja plant, it may respond to purple colour after applying the reagent. He failed to remember the names of the chemicals used in doing Fast Blue B Test in the present case. It is stated by him that on applying the DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 88 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act reagent of Fast Blue B Test on the contraband, it turned into scarlet red colour. It is stated by him that he has never tested bhaang at FSL, but he has tested for charas/ ganja.
A specific question was put to him that is it correct to say that in the report, it is not mentioned that the contraband or the vegetative material was having female flowering plant as per the microscopical observation, to which it is admitted by him that in the said report, female flowering plant is not mentioned.
It is stated by him that if material having flowering and fruiting part, it will be considered as ganja. It is stated by him that the exhibits analysed by him were having fruiting and flowering portion as well as leaves and stock. It is stated by him that they does not analyze leaves and stock, they only analyze fruiting and flowering tops of the plant.
A specific question was put to him if he mentioned in his report that he observed systolic and glandular hair on the vegetative material, while performing physical test, to which it is replied by him that it is not mentioned in the report.
A specific question was put to him if both the chemicals tests mentioned above will give the same respective colours i.e. violet and scarlet red, irrespective of the percentage/ quantity of Delta THC in the vegetative material under test, to which it is replied by him that the colour of the tests depend on concentration of Delta THC, CBD and CBN. It is stated by him that he has not seen bhaang plant so he could not tell whether bhaang plant also have flowering part and seed part alongwith leaves and stock. It is voluntarily stated DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 89 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act by him that the bhaang is not the subject matter of his report.
36. PW-32 retired ACP Raj Kumar Saha deposed that on 19.11.2022 he was posted as ACP, ER-II, Crime Branch, Krishna Nagar. On that day, at about 10:10 pm, while he was present at his residence, Inspector Ashish Dahima telephonically informed him that ASI Rambir who was in the area alongwith other staff for collecting information about drug traffickers, received secret information that three persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi will come in Innova car bearing no. AP-35H-3939 of silver car after bringing the ganja from Andhra Pradesh at about 10:30 pm to 11:00 pm to supply the ganja to one Rakal of Seemapuri and can be apprehended, if raided. This witness instructed Inspector Ashish Dahima to take appropriate legal action and conduct the raid through ASI Rambir.
It is stated by him that at about 12:06 pm, ASI Rambir telephonically informed him regarding the apprehension of accused persons with contraband. This witness reached the spot at about 12:20 pm. Accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi (correctly identified by the witness in the Court) were found in the custody of ASI Rambir and other team members alongwith their Innova car.
It is stated by him that he introduced himself to the accused persons. On his directions search of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi were taken, but no contraband was recovered. ASI Rambir prepared nil recovery memos already Ex. PW-1/D, Ex. PW-1/E and Ex. PW- 6/A which were attested by this witness at Point-X respectively. ASI Rambir DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 90 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act checked the Innova car on directions of this witness and five kattas were recovered from the car. Each were found containing vegetative material which appeared to be ganja from its physical appearance and smell. ASI Rambir telephonically informed Ld. Duty MM regarding apprehension of accused Laxmi with contraband.
It is stated by him that after giving necessary instructions to ASI Rambir, he left the spot.
It is stated by him that on the next day, his Reader placed before him copy of DD No. 143A regarding secret information already Ex. PW-15/B, he has seen and signed the same at Point-A. On the same day, one report U/s 57 NDPS Act was placed before him regarding recovery of contraband from Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi prepared by ASI Rambir already Ex. PW-15/C and this witness has seen and signed the same at Point-A. One report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding arrest of accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi prepared by SI Monu Chauhan already Ex. PW-15/D was seen and signed by this witness at Point-A. It is stated by him that in the intervening night of 21-22.11.2022, he was present in his office. SI Monu Chauhan requested this witness to issue authorization for search of house of accused Azad @ Rakal at D-Block, New Seemapuri for recovery of contraband. This witness prepared the authorization for search and handed over the same to SI Monu Chauhan. The authorization of search is Ex. PW-32/A which bears signature of this witness at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 22.11.2022 in the afternoon hours one report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding recovery of contraband from accused Azad DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 91 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act @ Rakal and his arrest prepared by SI Monu Chauhan already Ex. PW-15/F was placed before him which was seen and signed by him at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 05.01.2023 one report U/s 57 NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan regarding arrest of accused Farukh already Ex. PW-15/H was placed before him and he has seen and signed the same at Point- A. It is stated by him that on 14.03.2023 one report U/s 57 NDPS Act prepared by SI Monu Chauhan regarding arrest of accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey already Ex. PW-15/J was placed before him and he has seen and signed the same at Point-A. During his cross-examination on behalf of accused Azad @ Rakal, it is stated by him that neither ASI Rambir, nor Inspector Ashish Dahima told him as to from which direction accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi will be coming and from which route they will go towards New Seemapuri. It is stated by him that he reached the spot in government vehicle which was driven by official driver. It is stated by him that he has not checked the log book maintained by the driver. It is stated by him that the name of driver was HC Janmesh. It is stated by him that he does not use to certify the log book. It is stated by him that some portion of back side of Red Cross Hospital was visible from the spot.
37. PW-33 Ms. Kaveri Deshmukh, Junior Forensic Assistant Chemical Examiner, FSL, Rohini, Delhi deposed that she is working at FSL, Rohini since 2016. On 16.12.2022, she was posted as Junior Forensic Assistant at FSL DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 92 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Rohini. On that day, four sealed parcels were received in her division sealed with the seal of MC in FIR No. 270/22 dated 20.11.2022, U/s 20/25/29 NDPS Act, P.S. Crime Branch alongwith specimen seal, forwarding letter, copy of FIR, copy of seizure memo etc. were received in their office from ACP, ER-III Crime Branch vide letter reference no. 1342/ACP/ER-III dated 16.12.2022. Upon opening the parcel, each of them were found containing one mobile phone. She extracted the data from the mobile phone and SIM Card which were transferred in a pen drive.
It is stated by her that she prepared her report Ex. PW-33/A which bears her signature at Points A and B. She also issued certificate U/s 65B of IEA which is Ex. PW-33/B which bears her signature at Point-A. The pen drive is Ex. PW-33/C. She submitted her report in a sealed envelope alongwith the sealed parcels and pen drive for onward transmissions to the forwarding agency.
It is stated by her that on 21.02.2023 one sealed parcel sealed with the seal of MC in the present FIR was received in their office and marked to her division. She opened the same and it was found containing one mobile phone. She extracted the data and transferred the same on a CD. Thereafter, she prepared her report Ex. PW-33/D which bears her signatures at Points A & B. She also issued certificate U/s 65B of IEA which is Ex. PW-33/E which bears her signature at Point-A. The CD is Ex. PW-33/F. It is stated by her that she submitted her report in a sealed envelope alongwith the sealed parcels and pen drive for onward transmissions to the forwarding agency.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 93 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
38. PW-34 SI Shailender Tiwari deposed that on 25.11.2022 he was posted at ER-II Crime Branch, Krishna Nagar, Delhi. On that day, on the directions of senior officer, the investigation of the case was marked to him for the purpose of verification of owner of recovered car. He alongwith accused Noor Mohd. who was already on PC remand and other police staff left Delhi for Vishakhapatnam by train. After reaching there, this witness went to the address of the registered owner of the recovered car, where one lady namely B. Pushpa met them, who told that she does not know any R.K. Naik. The allottee of the said house Venktesh Babu also told that he does not know any R.K. Naik. This witness went to the local P.S. to verify the involvement of accused Noor Mohd., but no such involvement was found. This witness tried to search for source of contraband, but in vain. This witness went to the Vijaynagaram Transport Authority and obtained the registration details of the said vehicle. The print out of Form 24 regarding the transfer of ownership of the said vehicle running into five pages is Mark 34A (Colly). Since one mobile number of the registered owner R.K. Naik was mentioned in the said details, this witness sent notice U/s 67 NDPS Act through whatsapp to him since he could not be contacted verbally. Thereafter, they came back to Delhi alongwith accused Noor Mohd. and this witness handed over the transfer of registration details to SI Monu Chauhan.
39. PW-35 SI Monu Chauhan deposed that on 20.11.2022 he was posted at ER-II, Crime Branch. On that day, at around 8:00 am he was present in his office situated at P.S. Krishna Nagar when HC Mohit came to him and DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 94 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act handed over copy of FIR, original rukka and key of recovered Innova Car to him as the investigation of the case was marked to him by the orders of senior officers. ASI Rambir was also present in the office. He produced accused persons namely Noor Mohd. @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh (correctly identified by this witness).
It is stated by him that he has perused the original rukka and found that inadvertently the time of sending of rukka is mentioned as 3:45 pm instead of 3:45 am which was a clerical mistake. ASI Rambir handed over the documents prepared by him to this witness. This witness mentioned FIR number on the said documents. This witness interrogated all the three accused persons. He arrested accused persons namely Noor Mohd. @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh vide arrest memos already Ex. PW-1/I, Ex. PW-1/J and Ex. PW- 35/A bearing signatures of this witness at Point-X, respectively. Accused Noor Mohd. @ Babloo and Ujjwal Kumar were personally searched by this witness vide personal search memos already Ex. PW-1/N and Ex. PW-1/O bearing his signatures at Point-X, respectively. Accused Laxmi Singh was got personally search through W/HC Pooja and this witness prepared personal search memo Ex. PW-35/B bearing his signatures at Point-X. It is stated by him that apart from other articles, the respective original notices U/s 50 NDPS Act were recovered from the personal search of accused persons. One mobile phone make Oppo was also recovered from the personal search of accused Ujjwal Kumar, one mobile phone make Oppo of green colour was recovered from the personal search of accused Noor Mohd. @ Babloo and one mobile phone make Realme was recovered from the personal DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 95 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act search of accused Laxmi Singh. This witness kept all the three mobile phones opened for further investigation of the case. He took possession of the aforesaid mobile phones vide seizure memos already Ex. PW-1/M, Ex. PW-1/L and Ex. PW-1/K, respectively. He recorded disclosure statement of all the aforesaid accused persons which are already Ex. PW-20/A, Ex. PW-20/B and Ex. PW- 20/C bearing his signatures at Point-X. He prepared report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding arrest of accused Noor Mohammad @ Bablu, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh and submitted the same for onward transmission to the senior officers. The report already Ex. PW-15/D bearing his signatures at Point-X. It is stated by him that after medical examination of all the three accused persons, he produced them before Court of Ld. Duty MM and he left his office vide DD No. 31A Ex. PW-35/C bearing his signatures at Point-A. He moved an application for obtaining PC remand of accused Noor Mohammad. Ld. MM did not give the PC remand and sent all the three accused persons to one day judicial custody. Thereafter, this witness called ASI Rambir to reach the spot. He also went to the spot i.e. on the road heading from Apsara Border to New Seemapuri, near gate of J&K Pocket, Dilshad Garden, Delhi where at the instance of ASI Rambir, this witness prepared site plan already Ex. PW-6/C bearing his signatures at Point-X. Thereafter, he came back to their office alongwith ASI Rambir where he recorded statement of witnesses. This witness went to P.S. Crime Branch at Pushp Vihar and deposited the personal search articles of the accused persons at the maalkhana.
It is stated by him that on 21.11.2022 he went to the Special Court, NDPS, Shahdara District alongwith other staff members where all the DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 96 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act aforementioned three accused persons were produced from J/C. This witness moved an application for obtaining PC remand of accused Noor Mohmmad and ten days police custody remand of accused was granted by the Court. Accused persons namely Ujjwal and Laxmi Singh were sent to J/C. This witness also moved an application for conducting proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act, which was marked to Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM who fixed the date of sampling as 02.12.2022. This witness brought accused Noor Mohmmad to their office. He again interrogated accused Noor Mohmmad in detail in the evening hours at around 7:30-8:00 pm and recorded his supplementary disclosure statement already Ex. PW-30/A which bears signatures of this witness at Point-X. Accused Noor Mohmmad disclosed in his supplementary statement that the receiver Azad @ Rakal is resident of Machhi Market, D-Block, New Seemapuri, Delhi and that he has seen the house of Azad @ Rakal and can led them there for his apprehension. Accused Noor Mohmmad also disclosed that the said Azad @ Rakal is a criminal, involved in many criminal cases and was lodged in jail on many occasions and out of his (accused Azad @ Rakal) fear, earlier he (accused Noor Mohmmad) has not disclosed the location of house of Azad @ Rakal.
It is stated by him that Sh. Raj Kumar Saha, ACP ER-II, Crime Branch was present in the office and this witnesss briefed all the facts to him (ACP). It was decided by their team that they will conduct the raid at the house of Azad @ Rakal in the early morning hours. In the intervening night of 21- 22.11.2022, late in the night and early morning hours, this witness again went in the office of ACP Raj Kumar Saha who was present there and again discussed DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 97 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act the matter with him and orally requested him for issuance of search warrant/ authorization for search of house of Azad @ Rakal at D-Block, New Seemapuri for recovery of contraband. This witness has also placed the case file before him (ACP) at that time. ACP handed over one written authorization U/s 2 of Section 41 NDPS Act for search of the premises of Azad @ Rakal.
Thereafter, a raiding team was constituted comprising of this witness, HC Mohit, HC Rajeev, HC Prince and W/HC Pooja which was headed by Inspector Ashish Dahima. They left their office vide DD No. 1A in a private Ecco Sports car alongwith accused Noor Mohmmad for the house of Azad @ Rakal. This witness was carrying IO kit and electronic weighing machine with them. While they were leaving their office, they also took one Dustar car for raid. DD No.1A is exhibited as Ex. PW-35/D bearing signatures of this witness at Point-A. They took a route through Nala Road, Shyam Lal College, Shahdara Flyover, through the front of GTB Hospital and reached 70 Foota Road, New Seemapuri. Thereafter, at the instance of accused Noor Mohmmad, they passed through Nisaria Masjid and reached near Anganwadi Kendra, D-Block, New Seemapuri where they parked their vehicles. This witness requested few public persons to join the raiding team, but none agreed on hearing the name of Azad @ Rakal, out of his fear. They inspected the area and found it to be densely populated with small houses of three-four stories. Inspector Ashish Dahima called at their office and demanded more staff to come at the spot. After some time SI Shailender, HC Manish, HC Harshit, HC Sudhir and ASI Raj Singh also reached there.
It is stated by him that accused Noor Mohmmad was given in the DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 98 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act custody of ASI Raj Singh. Accused Noor Mohammad led them to one gali ahead of park and pointed out towards one house and identified it to be house of accused Azad @ Rakal. There were tiles on the wall of the said house. It's gate and window were made of steel. Light was on in the ground floor of the said house and there was movement of somebody in the ground floor. There was a main gate of the house and apart from it there was a small gate also. The gates were bolted from inside. HC Mohit and HC Prince knocked the gate, but nobody opened the same. In this process, accused Noor Mohmmad peeped inside the house through an opening on the gate and told them that one person is present inside the house and he is Azad @ Rakal. In the meanwhile, hearing the voices, the nearby residents also gathered there. From inquiry, this witness came to know that the number of the house was D-124. He requested few of them to join the proceedings, however, they said that they are distant relatives of accused Azad @ Rakal and they do not want to have enmity with him. Few of them resisted their (raiding team's) proceedings. This witness alongwith Inspector Ashish Dahima pacified them.
It is stated by him that HC Mohit put his hand inside the small gate after putting aside the small jaali of the gate and opened the bolt of the gate from inside. This witness entered inside the house through the gate and saw that there was staircase to go upstairs and on the right side there were two-three steel staircase to go down in the hall at the ground floor. One person was present at the ground floor of the house. This witness opened the main gate of the house from inside. The staff entered inside the house. Accused Noor Mohmmad also entered and identified the said person as Azad @ Rakal. This witness correctly DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 99 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act identified accused Azad @ Rakal through video conferencing. This witness interrogated the accused and he disclosed his name. This witness apprised the accused about the fact of apprehension of accused Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal and Laxmi and recovery of contraband from them and that they have disclosed that they were about to give the delivery of contraband to him. This witness told him (accused Azad @ Rakal) that they have apprehension that he may be in possession of more contraband from his possession. This witness has also shown the authorization of search of his (accused Azad @ Rakal's) house to him.
It is stated by him that there was a sofa kept on ground floor. One stapler, three boxes of stapler pins and some small plastic pouches were lying on the ground floor.
It is stated by him that he apprised accused Azad @ Rakal about his legal rights by saying that if he wants, he can get himself searched in the presence of any Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate or that he can be taken to nearest Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate for this purpose and also explained meaning of Gazetted Officer and Magistrate in simple language to the accused and that he can also take search of police team members prior to his search and search of his house, however accused refused to get himself searched in the presence of any Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate as well as to take search of the raiding team members.
It is stated by him that he prepared notice U/s 50 NDPS Act in duplicate and handed over the original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act already Ex. PW-1/Z3 bearing his signature at Point-D to accused Azad @ Rakal. The DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 100 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act contents of the notice were read over to accused. The accused told that he is illiterate and can only sign in Hindi. Accused Azad @ Rakal signed on the carbon copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act as receipt of original notice. Thereafter, the said denial of accused was noted down by this witness in his handwriting on the carbon copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act below which the accused signed in Hindi.
It is stated by him that the carbon copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act issued to accused Azad @ Rakal, already Ex. PW-1/S, bears signatures of accused at Point-B as receipt of original notice, carbon impression of signatures of this witness at Point-G, refusal of the accused from Points X to X1, signatures of the accused below the refusal at Point-C and signature of this witness below the refusal at Point-G1.
It is stated by him that cursory search of the accused was taken but no contraband was found from his possession and this witness prepared nil recovery memo, already Ex. PW-1/T which bears his signature at Point-X. Thereafter, accused Azad @ Rakal was left in the custody of HC Prince and he alongwith accused remained at the ground floor and this witness, HC Mohit, HC Rajeev and W/HC Pooja went upstairs for searching first floor, second floor and third floor. No incriminating material were recovered from the said floors. Thereafter, this witness alongwith HC Mohit, HC Rajeev and W/HC Pooja came down to ground floor. On directions of this witness, W/HC Pooja went outside the house in the gali. This witness called Inspector Ashish Dahima inside the ground floor.
It is stated by him that he inquired from the accused Azad @ Rakal DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 101 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act about the stapler, three boxes of stapler pins and small pouches of polythene, upon which he was initially avoiding the questions, but later on when he was strictly interrogated, he told that he was filling the ganja in the small pouches and stapling the same, when the raid was conducted and on seeing the police he has hidden the ganja.
Thereafter, accused Azad @ Rakal got recovered one white colour heavy plastic katta and some stapled polythene pouches containing ganja which were kept behind the sofa lying in the hall of ground floor. There were total 42 small pouches filled with ganja which was visible as the pouches were transparent. This witness opened and checked the contents of plastic katta and of small pouches, which were found containing vegetative material, which appeared to be ganja from its physical appearance and smell. Inspector Ashish Dahima instructed this witness to conduct the necessary legal proceedings and thereafter went outside the house.
It is stated by him that on the plastic katta "victoria rajdhani chokar" was written.
This witness deposed on the same lines as deposed by PW-1 HC Mohit Kumar, PW-6 ASI Rambir Singh, PW-20 HC Rajeev and PW-30 HC Prince on the aspect of recovery proceedings qua accused Azad @ Rakal and qua preparation of site plan.
It is further stated by him that he left their office for production of accused Azad @ Rakal vide DD No. 96A Ex. PW-35/E bearing signature of this witness at Point-A. Accused Azad @ Rakal was produced from the Court and this witness obtained his five days PC remand.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 102 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act It is stated by him that he prepared report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding recovery of contraband and arrest of accused Azad @ Rakal and submitted the same for onward transmission to the senior officers. The report is already Ex. PW-15/F bearing signatures of this witness at Point-C. During the police custody remand of the accused Azad @ Rakal and Noor Mohmmad, this witness tried to search of the source of the contraband i.e. Devender Pandey, but in vain. Accused persons namely Azad @ Rakal and Noor Mohammad have shown one house at Adarsh Nagar, Biharipura, Ghaziabad and one house at Chhaprola, Gautambudh Nagar identified by them as houses of accused Devender Pandey was not found present in both the houses.
It is stated by him that on 25.11.2022 by the orders of senior officials, he handed over the custody of accused Noor Mohmmad to SI Shailender Tiwari who alongwith accused Noor Mohmmad went to Vishakhapatnam for searching of the ownership of recovered Innova Car and also for searching the owner of the same and for searching source of contraband namely Ghasi @ Balu @ Tirupati.
It is stated by him that on 26.11.2022, accused Azad @ Rakal has shown house of one Farukh who was one of his associates, however, the house was found locked. This witness produced accused Azad @ Rakal before the Court and he was sent to J/C. It is stated by him that on 30.11.2022, SI Shailender Tiwari met him and handed over custody of accused Noor Mohmmad to him alongwith the documents of the recovered car. The owner was found to be one Rajender Kumar Nayak.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 103 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act It is stated by him that he moved an application for sampling of contraband recovered from accused Azad @ Rakal U/s 52A NDPS Act and the date was fixed for the same as 13.12.2022. On his earlier application moved for conducting the sampling of contraband recovered from accused Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal and Laxmi, the date was fixed as 15.12.2022.
It is stated by him that on 13.12.2022 sampling proceedings of the contraband recovered from accused Azad @ Rakal was conducted by Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM after the parcels were produced by ASI Satyavir and the same was photographed stepwise by SI Ishwar Prakash. After the sampling proceedings, this witness handed over the sealed parcels containing the samples as well as the remaining contraband, sample seal and copy of order of the Court to ASI Satyavir to be deposited in the maalkhana. This witness also lodged DD No. 126A in this regard which is Ex. PW-35/F bearing his signature at Point-A. It is stated by him that on 15.12.2022 sampling proceedings of the contraband recovered from accused Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal and Laxmi was conducted by Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM after the parcels were produced by ASI Jagbir and the same was photographed stepwise by SI Ishwar Prakash. After the sampling proceedings, this witness handed over the sealed parcels containing the samples as well as the remaining contraband, sample seal and copy of order of the Court to ASI Jagbir to be deposited in the maalkhana. This witness also lodged DD No. 112A in this regard which is Ex. PW-35/G bearing his signature at Point-A. It is stated by him that he obtained the photographs of the sampling proceedings and deposited one set each of the same before the Court of Ld. DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 104 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act MM. In the meanwhile, this witness observed that the Ld. MM in his order dated 15.12.2022 had mentioned that the parcels Mark A, B, C, D & E, containing the contraband were produced during the sampling proceedings and were found to be sealed with the seals of MC and RS instead of RS and RS with which the same were originally sealed. This witness moved an application before the Court of Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM for rectifying the clerical mistake, however, it was rejected by Ld. MM. This witness moved an application before Prosecution Department for preferring revision against order of dismissal of Ld. MM.
It is stated by him that he got issued NBWs against Devender Kumar @ Shatrughan @ Pandey and Rajender Kumar Nayak who were absconding. He handed over the NBWs of Rajender Kumar Nayak to ASI Netrapal for its execution. The same could not be executed. This witness got issued fresh NBWs against him (accused Rajender Kumar Nayak) on his permanent address situated at District Ganjam, Orissa.
It is stated by him that on 04.01.2023 he apprehended Farukh on the basis of secret information, served upon notice U/s 50 NDPS Act to him, no contraband was found from his possession. He arrested accused Farukh. This witness prepared report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding his arrest and submitted the same for onward transmission to the senior officers. Farukh was discharged.
It is stated by him that since the NBWs against accused Devender Kumar were also not executed, he got issued process U/s 82 Cr.P.C. against him.
It is stated by him that on 12.03.2023, after taking permission for DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 105 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act out station, he alongwith other staff left their office for search of accused Devender at his native Village Kharidah, P.S. Bheldi, District Saran, Bihar vide DD No. 16 dated 12.03.2023. They left their office in a private vehicle.
It is stated by him that the said vehicle was driven by HC Rajeev, HC Mohit and this witness in turn on their way to Bihar. He had taken laptop, portable printer, UPS, electronic weighing machine and IO kit in the car.
This witness deposed on the same lines as deposed by PW-20 HC Rajeev and PW-30 HC Prince qua investigation in respect of accused Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey conducted on 13.03.2023 being part of the raiding team.
It is further stated by him that he kept the recovered mobile phone in open condition for further investigation. He recorded disclosure statement of the accused and same is already Ex. PW-1/Z2 which bears signature of this witness at Point-X. It is stated by him that accused Devender @ Shatrughan @ Pandey was taken to P.S. Bheldi where this witness intimated the local police about arrest of accused Devender vide his (this witness) application Ex. PW-35/H bearing his signatures at Point-A. This witness also got verified parcha 12 of accused persons namely Noor Mohd. and Ujjwal and also verified their previous involvement and one previous criminal involvement of accused Ujjwal was found at P.S. Bheldi. Thereafter, they came back to Delhi alongwith accused Devender and reached there on 14.03.2023 and this witness lodged DD No. 132A Ex. PW-35/I bearing his signatures at Point-A. This witness deposited the personal search article of the accused at maalkhana. After the medical DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 106 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act examination of accused, he was produced before the Court and this witness obtained 07 days PC remand. During PC remand the accused Devender made further disclosure that he obtained SIM of mobile number 8800146356 in the name of his known to Pratima Tirki and was using the same, in this regard this witness recorded his (accused's) supplementary disclosure statement which is already Ex. PW-20/L1 which bears signature of this witness at Point-X. It is stated by him that he prepared report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding arrest of accused Devender @ Shatrughan and submitted the same for onward transmission to senior officers which is already Ex. PW-15/J bearing signatures of this witness at Point-C. It is stated by him that he further entrusted NBWs issued against accused Rajender Kumar Nayak for execution to ASI Netrapal as per directions of senior officers, who left their office for District Ganjam, Orissa. On 04.04.2023, ASI Netrapal came back to their office and produced accused Rajander Kumar Nayak before this witness and also handed over the arresting documents and other documents prepared by him to this witness. This witness correctly identified accused Rajender Kumar Nayak through video conferencing. This witness recorded supplementary disclosure statement of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak already Ex. PW-20/R bearing signatures of this witness at Point-C, in which he disclosed that accused Devender @ Pandey has given one GPS to him with directions to install in the vehicle which will come at Vishakhapatnam for taking the contraband and that he has installed the GPS in hidden condition below speedometer. This witness produced him (accused Rajender Kumar Nayak) before the Court and obtained two days PC remand.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 107 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act It is stated by him that on 06.04.2023, this witness alongwith other staff and accused Rajender Kumar Nayak went to maalkhana of P.S. Crime Branch, from where MHC(M) HC Rakesh took out the ignition key of the recovered Innova car from the maalkhana. Thereafter, they again came back to their office situated in the premises of P.S. Krishna Nagar. HC Rakesh also accompanied them. The recovered Innova car was parked in the parking of the premises. It was identified by accused Rajender Kumar Nayak. The car was opened and accused Rajender Kumar Nayak pointed out towards one GPS instrument which was installed below the speedometer. This witness checked the same. One SIM Card of Airtel company was found installed in the GPS instrument. This witness noted down the IMEI number of the GPS as well as the SIM Card. He kept the GPS instrument in a white envelope, which was sealed with the seal of MC. This witness took into possession the GPS instrument alongwith SIM vide seizure memo already Ex. PW-20/S bearing signatures of this witness at Point-X. During investigation, this witness obtained the details of GPS through the concerned company after serving the notice U/s 91 Cr.P.C. to it.
It is stated by him that he obtained the CAF and CDRs of the mobile numbers of the accused persons and found that accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal and Laxmi were using one SIM Card each which were obtained by using fake ID. SIM Card of one of the mobile number of accused Devender @ Pandey was found registered in the name of Pratima Tirki, who was found lodged in Korapot Jail, Orissa. Later on, her statement was also recorded in the present case.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 108 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act It is stated by him that he also analyzed the CAF and CDRs of the mobile numbers of the arrested accused persons and found that they were in regular contact with each other. Conference calls were also found to be made by the accused persons as per their CDRs. (This witness has mentioned the details in the charge-sheet).
It is stated by him that during investigation, he obtained the bank account details of accused Ujjwal.
It is stated by him that during investigation, he deposited the mobile phones recovered from the accused persons with MHC(M). This witness also sent the exhibits of contraband as well as the mobile phones of accused persons to FSL for analysis.
This witness recorded statements of witnesses. He obtained the result of FSL regarding the contraband. He prepared the charge-sheet and submitted the same before the Court. Later on, after obtaining the result of FSL regarding mobile phones, he submitted the supplementary charge-sheet before the Court.
It is stated by him that the sampling proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act has already been conducted before Ld. MM. Production of case properties is therefore dispensed with.
It was observed that the remaining case properties have already been exhibited during the testimonies of earlier witnesses.
This witness has brought the copy of his application moved before Ld. MM Sh. Bharat Aggarwal for making correction in the order of Ld. MM dated 15.12.2022 of the sampling proceedings regarding inadvertent mentioning DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 109 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act of seal of MC instead of seal of RS on the parcels. The application was put up for 22.12.2022. The copy of application is Mark-35A which bears signature of this witness at Point-A and noting of Ld. MM regarding fixing of date in the application at Point-X. This witness has also brought the copy of order of Ld. MM dated 22.12.2022 on his aforementioned application, supplied to him by the Court of Ld. MM having stamps and seals of the Court, whereby his application was dismissed. The copy of order is Ex. PW-35/J. During his cross-examination on behalf of accused persons, it is stated by him that he had not collected record of the log book maintained by driver of the ACP qua his visit to the spot on 20.11.2022. It is stated by him that he had not collected CDR record qua telephonic call made by ASI Rambir to ACP Raj Kumar Saha for calling him to the spot on 20.11.2022. It is denied by him that ACP Raj Kumar Saha never visited the spot on 20.11.2022 or due to this reason above-mentioned record was not placed on record by him (this witness). It is stated by him that the spot of recovery from Noor Mohd. @ Babloo was near 1st gate of J&K Block from Apsara border side. He could not tell, if 2nd gate was visible from 1st gate from Apsara border side or not. On a specific question put to him that can he tell the distance between the spot and turn of the road going towards Kalandra Colony, it is replied by him that one has to go on the wrong side to go to the road going towards Kalandra Colony from the spot. It is stated by him that the distance between spot and turn on that road going towards Kalandra Colony is 300 meters. It is stated by him that the place in their office where the Innova car of the accused persons was parked DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 110 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act was an open space having boundary wall. It is stated by him that in the same premises, Police Station Krishna Nagar and SEM Court are situated. It is stated by him that their office used to park their vehicles at a particular place and there was another place for parking of the vehicles of P.S. Krishna Nagar. It is stated by him that after entering the boundary of the premises there is no separate gate or barrier to stop anyone for reaching their vehicles parked there. It is stated by him that he has obtained the CDRs of the mobile phone of accused Noor Mohd. in which his locations were mentioned at different times. It is stated by him that he has obtained the CDRs of the mobile phone of the accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Ujjwal and Laxmi in which their location and movements were shown from Vishakhapatnam. It is denied by him that he forcibly abducted accused persons namely Noor Mohd., Laxmi and Ujjwal from U.P. and all the false documents including the parcels were prepared by him and due to this reason, his seal of MC was found on the case property Mark A, B, C, D and E. It is denied by him that ASI Rambir was a planted witness and no recovery took place in his presence or by him or due to this reason, his seal of RS was not found during the proceedings conducted U/s 52A NDPS Act before Ld. MM and in the observation of the Court, seal of MC in place of seal of RS was found in the case property Mark A, B, C, D and E. It is denied by him that he prepared a false and fabricated story in which he had shown ASI Rambir as the first IO, despite the fact that he was not at all involved in the investigation of this case. It is denied by him that he prepared false and fabricated DD entry and search authorization as well as disclosure statements of the accused persons to make out a false case against the accused. It is denied by him that HC Pooja was not DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 111 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act the part of any raiding team. It is admitted by him that in the statement of none of the witnesses, it is mentioned that secret informer told ASI Rambir that accused persons would come from the side of Apsara border and would pass through the underpass to go to Seemapuri. It is stated by him that in none of the documents prepared by ASI Rambir and also prepared at his instance, which were handed over to this witness, it is mentioned that he (ASI Rambir) received secret information that accused persons would come from the side of Apsara border and would pass through the underpass to go to Seemapuri. It is stated by him that it is not mentioned in statement of any witness that the raiding team members came to know that accused persons will not go through Kalender Colony to go to New Seemapuri. It is admitted by him that in the statements of all the raiding team members as well as in the rukka, it is mentioned that Innova car was noticed at 11:20 pm and was stopped by the raiding team members at 11:25 pm.
40. PW-36 ASI Netra Pal deposed that on 30.03.2023, he was posted at ER-II Crime Branch, Delhi. On that day, he was entrusted with NBWs of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak for its execution. HC Prince and HC Rajeev joined the investigation with this witness. On that day after taking permission from the senior officers, they left for out station i.e. for District Ganjam, Orissa by train. On 31.03.2023 late in the night they got down at Bhuvneshwar Railway Station and from there they proceeded for P.S. Baguda, District Ganjam, Orissa in the bus and reached there in the morning of 01.04.2023. This witness got recorded their arrival entry in the local P.S. ASI Subhala Kanhar DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 112 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act from the local Police Station joined their team. They disclosed the address and name of accused Rajender Singh Nayak to the ASI of local police and thereafter they alongwith said ASI Subhala reached Village Karisinghi in a local three wheeler tempo. All of them were in civil dress.
It is stated by him that ASI Subhala Kanhar called his informer there, apprised him about the facts and the name of accused Rajender Singh Nayak. The informer pointed out towards one house situated on the road of Village Karisinghi and told that it is house of one person, whose title is Behra and the informer further told that son-in-law of the owner of the said house is residing there for last few days in the said house. Thereafter, informer left the spot. ASI Subhala Kanhar also left the spot stating that he is having some urgent official work.
It is stated by him that he requested 3-4 public persons to join the investigation, but none agreed to join the investigation and left without disclosing their names and addresses while seeking their personal excuses. No notice could be served upon them due to paucity of time.
It is stated by him that after some time one person aged about 30 years came out from the said house and his physical appearance was matching with what was told by the secret informer to them. They apprehended him. This witness disclosed their identity to that person and has also shown his ID Card to the said Rajender Kumar Nayak. That person disclosed his name as Rajender Kumar Nayak (witness has correctly identified the accused). This witness also apprised accused about the facts of the present case and about the arrest of co- accused persons.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 113 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act It is stated by him that he prepared notice U/s 50 NDPS Act in duplicate using carbon paper. He told the accused that they have information that he may be in possession of contraband and for this purpose they have to take his search. This witness apprised the accused that he has a legal right that if he want, he can be searched in the presence of Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate and also explained meaning of Gazetted Officer and Magistrate in simple language to the accused, however accused told that he can read Hindi, but cannot write it and he refused to get himself searched in the presence of any Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate as well as to take search of the raiding team members. This witness handed over original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act to the accused and accused signed on the copy of the same as receipt of original notice. Thereafter, the said denial of accused was noted down by this witness in his handwriting on the carbon copy of notice U/s 50 NDPS Act. The refusal of the accused was read over to the accused and he signed on the same. The carbon copy of the notice U/s 50 NDPS Act is already Ex. PW-20/M bearing carbon impression of signature of this witness at Point-E, signatures of accused as receipt at Point-B, refusal of accused from Points X to X1, signatures of accused below his refusal at Points C and C1 and his signatures below the refusal at Point E1.
It is stated by him that he took the cursory search of accused, but no contraband was found, therefore he prepared nil recovery memo which is already Ex. PW-20/N which bears his signature at Point-C. It is stated by him that he arrested the accused Rajender Kumar Nayak vide arrest memo already Ex. PW-20/O and personally searched him DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 114 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act vide personal search memo Ex. PW-20/P which bears his signature at Point-C, respectively. In the personal search of accused original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act, copy of Aadhaar Card and Rs. 300/- were recovered. This witness recorded disclosure statement of the accused already Ex. PW-20/Q which bears his signature at Point-C. It is stated by him that after medical examination of the accused, he was taken to P.S. Bugoda where he was lodged in the lock-up. This witness prepared report U/s 57 NDPS Act regarding arrest of accused and sent it through whatsapp to Inspector Ashish Dahima for onward transmission to senior officers. Report of this witness already Ex. PW-15/L bears his signature at Point-C. It is stated by him that on 02.04.2023 on his directions, HC Rajeev went to P.S. Polasara, District Ganjam, Orissa having jurisdiction of the area i.e. Village Bakisahi, Poundripuda, P.S. Polasara, District Ganjam, Orissa in which house of accused Rajender Kumar was situated for verification of parcha 12. This witness obtained the transit remand from the local Court. HC Rajeev got the parcha 12 of the accused verified from there, obtained the copy of report from P.S. Polasara and came back to P.S. Bugoda and handed over the report to this witness.
Thereafter, the accused was taken to Bhuvneshwar Railway Station by bus, from where they boarded the train for Delhi and reached Delhi on 04.04.2023 and this witness handed over custody of accused Rajender Kumar to SI Monu Chauhan.
It is stated by him that the original notice U/s 50 NDPS Act handed DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 115 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act over by him to the accused already Ex. PW-30/B which bears his signature at Point-C.
41. PW W/HC Pooja was dropped from the list of witnesses as other witnesses on the same fact have already been examined in the present case.
42. During trial, accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar, Laxmi Singh and Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey admitted the proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act conducted by Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM on 13.12.2022 and 15.12.2022 (Ex. AD-1 and Ex. AD-2) U/s 330 BNSS/ 294 Cr.P.C.
Sh. Deepak Ghai, Advocate on behalf of accused Azad @ Rakal and Sh. Yuvraj Singh, Advocate on behalf of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak admitted the proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act conducted by Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM on 13.12.2022 and 15.12.2022 (Ex. AD-1 and Ex. AD-2) U/s 330 BNSS/ 294 Cr.P.C.
43. During trial, accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar, Laxmi Singh, Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey, Azad @ Rakal and Rajender Kumar Nayak admitted the reply of Balaji Tele Serve Private Ltd. to the notice U/s 91 Cr.P.C. regarding the details of person and the vehicle to whom the GPS Tracker, IMEI No. 356218600021891 was issued (Ex. AD-3) U/s 330 BNSS/ 294 Cr.P.C.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 116 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
44. No other witness was examined by the prosecution. Thereafter, P.E. was closed vide order dated 13.12.2025.
STATEMENTS OF ACCUSED PERSONS
45. Separate statements of accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein they pleaded their innocence and denied entire prosecution's case. It is stated by them that being the police officials' witnesses have deposed against them in order to prove their false case. It is stated by them that they were lifted from their house at Vishakhapatnam and were falsely implicated in the present case.
46. Separate statement of accused Azad @ Rakal was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he pleaded his innocence and denied entire prosecution's case. It is stated by him that there was no clerical mistake in the order of sampling proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act of Ld. MM dated 15.12.2022. It is stated by him that the report Ex. PW-31/A is false. It is stated by him that mobile numbers 9560799742, 9060891657, 8826671401, 9065436476, 8800146356 and 9650326199, did not belong to him and he had never used the same. It is stated by him that being the police officials witnesses have deposed against him in order to prove their false case. It is stated by him that he was falsely implicated in the present case. It is stated by him that police officials forcefully entered into his house from the roof of neighbour's house. It is stated by him that all her family members were present in the house. It is DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 117 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act stated by him that he does not know any other co-accused of the present case. It is stated by him that the contraband was planted upon him. It is stated by him that his name is only Azad and not Rakal.
47. Separate statement of accused Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he pleaded his innocence and denied entire prosecution's case. It is stated by him that being the police officials witnesses have deposed against him in order to prove their false case. It is stated by him that he was falsely implicated in the present case. It is stated by him that he was lifted from his house.
48. Separate statement of accused Rajender Kumar Nayak was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he pleaded his innocence and denied entire prosecution's case. It is stated by him that he was falsely arrested. It is stated by him that being the police officials witnesses have deposed against him in order to prove their false case. It is stated by him that he was falsely implicated in the present case.
49. All the accused persons chose not to lead any defence evidence.
FINAL ARGUMENTS
50. This Court has heard the Ld. Additional Public Prosecutor and the Ld. Counsel for the accused persons and perused the written statement filed on behalf of accused persons as well as record, carefully.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 118 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
51. It is contended by Ld. Addl. PP for the State that all the procedures as per NDPS Act have been complied with in the present matter. It is contended that all the necessary compliances were done by the police and minor non- compliances should not result in acquittal. It is contended that there is major recovery of ganja in the present case as total 72 Kgs & 200 grams was recovered from the car wherein accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh were travling and 22 Kgs & 795 grams was recovered from the house of accused Azad @ Rakal. Such major recovery suggests that it was not planted. It is contended that the most important thing is recovery of contraband which is beyond doubt in the present case. It is contended that accused Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey was the mastermind and accused Rajender Kumar Nayak provided car for the supply of ganja, accused Laxmi Singh was used as a camouflage to give an impression that a family is traveling in the car. It is contended that the CDRs of the accused persons showing their movement from Delhi to Andhra Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh to Delhi. There is nothing on record to suggest that police officials had any enmity with the accused persons. Thus, the offences alleged against the accused persons are proved beyond reasonable doubt.
52. Per contra, it is contended on behalf of the accused persons that accused persons have been falsely implicated in the present case. They were picked from somewhere else and falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that no public witness has been joined in the investigation. It DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 119 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act is contended that the case property was not properly handled and there are discrepancies qua seals on the case property recovered from accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh. It is further contended that there is no video recording or the photography of the search and seizure procedures.
Legal Requirement to prove the Charges :-
53. Accused persons have been charged for offence U/s 20 NDPS Act. Section 20 NDPS Act reads as under :
"20. Punishment for contravention in relation to cannabis plant and cannabis. Whoever, in contravention of any provision of this Act or any rule or order made or condition of licence granted thereunder,--
(a) cultivates any cannabis plant; or
(b) produces, manufactures, possesses, sells, purchases, transports, imports inter-
State, exports inter-State or uses cannabis, shall be punishable,--
(i) where such contravention relates to clause (a) with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees; and
(ii) where such contravention relates to sub-clause (b),-- (A) and involves small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or with both;
(B) and involves quantity lesser than commercial quantity but greater than small quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees;
(C) and involves commercial quantity, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to twenty years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees:
Provided that the court may, for reasons to be recorded in the judgment, impose a fine exceeding two lakh rupees."
(emphasis supplied) DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 120 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.FIR No. 270/2022
(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
54. As far as contravention of the provision is concerned, Section 8 of NDPS Act completely prohibits the possession of narcotic drug or psychotropic substances, except for medical or scientific purposes, that too in the manner as prescribed by the Act. This section reads as under :
"No person shall--
(a) cultivate any coca plant or gather any portion of coca plant; or
(b) cultivate the opium poppy or any cannabis plant; or
(c) produce, manufacture, possess, sell, purchase, transport, warehouse, use, consume, import inter-State, export inter-State, import into India, export from India or tranship any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, except for medical or scientific purposes and in the manner and to the extent provided by the provisions of this Act or the rules or orders made thereunder and in a case where any such provision, imposes any requirement by way of licence, permit or authorisation also in accordance with the terms and conditions of such licence, permit or authorisation:
Provided that, and subject to the other provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, the prohibition against the cultivation of the cannabis plant for the production of Ganja or the production, possession, use, consumption, purchase, sale, transport, warehousing, import inter-State and export inter-State of Ganja for any purpose other than medical and scientific purpose shall take effect only from the date which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf:
Provided further that nothing in this section shall apply to the export of poppy straw for decorative purposes."
(emphasis supplied)
55. As per the Section, possession of all narcotic drugs is prohibited by Section 8.
56. The term "narcotic drugs" is defined in Section 2(xiv) as under:-
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 121 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.FIR No. 270/2022
(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
(xiv) "narcotic drug" means coca leaf, cannabis (hemp), opium, poppy straw and includes all manufactured drugs;
57. As per the definition, 'narcotic drug' includes cannabis (hemp). Therefore, the possession of cannabis (hemp) is prohibited by Section 8 of NDPS Act.
58. The term "cannabis (hemp)" is defined in Section 2(iii) of NDPS Act, as under :
"(iii) "cannabis (hemp)" means--
(a) charas, that is, the separated resin, in whatever form, whether crude or purified, obtained from the cannabis plant and also includes concentrated preparation and resin known as hashish oil or liquid hashish;
(b) Ganja, that is, the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant (excluding the seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops), by whatever name they may be known or designated; and
(c) any mixture, with or without any neutral material, of any of the above forms of cannabis or any rink prepared therefrom"
(emphasis supplied)
59. "Cannabis (hemp)" besides other things also means Ganja i.e. the flowering and fruiting tops of cannabis plant. In the present case, the prosecution would be required to prove that the recovered substance was Ganja.
60. The prosecution would also be required to prove that the quantity of the contraband recovered was of small, intermediate or commercial quantity. The terms "small quantity" and "commercial quantity" are defined in Section 2(xxiiia) & 2 (viia), as under :-
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 122 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.FIR No. 270/2022
(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act "(xxiiia) "small quantity", in relation to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, means any quantity lesser than the quantity specified by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette;"
(viia) "commercial quantity", in relation to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, means any quantity greater than the quantity specified by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette."
61. The notification specifying small quantity & commercial quantity vide SO1055(E) dated 19.10.2001 mentions the small quantity and commercial quantity for various Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances, including 'Ganja'. As per entry at serial no.55 in the said notification, the small quantity for Ganja is 1000 gms and commercial quantity is 20 Kgs.
62. In order to prove the charges U/s 20 NDPS Act, the prosecution is required to prove the following facts :-
(1) That the accused persons were in possession of contraband in furtherance of their criminal conspiracy.
(2) That the possession was in contravention of the provision of the Act or any rule on order made or condition of license granted thereunder.
(3) That the contraband was Ganja.
(4) That the quantity of the contraband was commercial for Section 20 NDPS Act.
63. Besides proving the aforesaid facts, the prosecution is also required to prove that the investigating agency carried out the investigation in compliance with the provisions of NDPS Act. The investigating agency must DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 123 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act adhere strictly to the legal procedure established during the search, ensuring transparency and fairness in the investigation. By adhering to this procedure, the agency demonstrates its commitment to protecting personal liberty, a fundamental right of citizens. This ensures that the search was conducted in a manner that upholds the principles of the judicial system. The credibility of the evidence presented by the prosecution is enhanced when the investigating agency follows the statute scrupulously as held by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case titled as Koyappakalathil Ahamed Koya vs. A.S. Menon and Ors. (03.07.2002 - BOMHC) : MANU/MH/1838/2002 :-
"In view of the principle that Ceaser's wife must be above-board, the investigating agency has to be consistent with the procedure laid down by law while conducting the search and it has to be above-board in following the procedure by investigating into the crime and if that is done it would assure the judicial mind that by giving importance to the personal liberty a fundamental right of (he citizen, the search was conducted. If that is done, then there would be creditworthiness to such evidence which has been adduced by the prosecution. The investigating agency must follow the procedure as envisaged by the statute scrupulously and failure to do so must be viewed by the higher authorities seriously inviting action against the concerned official so that laxity on the part of the investigating authority is curbed."
Thus, the failure to adhere to the procedure raises a doubt in the mind of the Court regarding the manner in which the investigation is carried out, which obviously favors the accused.
64. It is settled legal proposition that the procedure provided under Chapter V of the NDPS Act has to be scrupulously followed for the Court to raise such presumption. For raising the presumption U/s 54 of the Act it must be first established that recovery was made from the accused persons and the DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 124 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act procedure provided under the NDPS Act followed thoroughly without fail. It is further settled law that for attracting the provision of Section 54 of NDPS Act, it is essential for the prosecution to establish the element of possession of contraband by the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt for the burden to shift to the accused persons to prove their innocence. This burden on the prosecution is a heavy burden. To decide whether the burden has been discharged or not by the prosecution, it is relevant to peruse the record and evidence and consider the submissions made by the parties.
ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE
65. The Court will now proceed to examine and discuss the various aspects of the case and the relevant pieces of evidence under distinct headings as follows:-
Discussion on the point of compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act
66. Section 42 NDPS Act is as under:
42. Power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without warrant or authorisation.--
(l) Any such officer (being an officer superior in rank to a peon, sepoy or consta- ble) of the departments of central excise, narcotics, customs, revenue intelligence or any other department of the Central Government including para-military forces or armed forces as is empowered in this behalf by general or special order by the Central Government, or any such officer (being an officer superior in rank to a peon, sepoy or constable) of the revenue, drugs control, excise, police or any other department of a State Government as is empowered in this behalf by general or special order of the State Government, if he has reason to believe from per- sonal knowledge or information given by any person and taken down in writing that any narcotic drug, or psychotropic substance, or controlled substance in re- spect of which an offence punishable under this Act has been committed or any document or other article which may furnish evidence of the commission of such offence or any illegally acquired property or any document or other article which DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 125 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act may furnish evidence of holding any illegally acquired property which is liable for seizure or freezing or forfeiture under Chapter VA of this Act is kept or con- cealed in any building, conveyance or enclosed place, may between sunrise and sunset,-
(a) enter into and search any such building, conveyance or place;
(b) in case of resistance, break open any door and remove any obstacle to such en- try;
(c) seize such drug or substance and all materials used in the manufacture thereof and any other article and any animal or conveyance which he has reason to be- lieve to be liable to confiscation under this Act and any document or other article which he has reason to believe may furnish evidence of the commission of any of- fence punishable under this Act or furnish evidence of holding any illegally ac- quired property which is liable for seizure or freezing or forfeiture under Chapter VA of this Act; and
(d) detain and search, and, if he thinks proper, arrest any person whom he has rea- son to believe to have committed any offence punishable under this Act:
Provided that in respect of holder of a licence for manufacture of manufactured drugs or psychotropic substances or controlled substances granted under this Act or any rule or order made thereunder, such power shall be exercised by an officer not below the rank of sub-inspector:
Provided further that if such officer has reason to believe that a search warrant or authorisation cannot be obtained without affording opportunity for the conceal- ment of evidence or facility for the escape of an offender, he may enter and search such building, conveyance or enclosed place at any time between sunset and sun- rise after recording the grounds of his belief.
(2) Where an officer takes down any information in writing under sub-section (1) or records grounds for his belief under the proviso thereto, he shall within sev-
enty-two hours send a copy thereof to his immediate official superior."
(emphasis supplied)
67. As per settled provision of Section 42 of the NDPS Act, the concerned police officer, to whom the secret information was received, is required to inform his immediate senior officer immediately about the secret information and send the information so reduced into writing within 72 hours of its receipt to superior officer.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 126 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
68. In the present matter, secret information was received by ASI Rambir Singh (PW-6), while he alongwith his team was patrolling in the area for search of drug peddlers and drug suppliers. In such patrolling while he was present near Red Cross Hospital, Dilshad Garden at 9:30 pm, one secret informer met him and apprised that three persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal and Laxmi Singh are bringing ganja from Andhra Pradesh in a silver colour Innova car bearing no. AP35 H 3939 to give delivery to one Rakaal at New Seemapuri between 10:30 pm to 11:00 pm.
69. ASI Rambir Singh was an empowered officer as per Section 42 NDPS Act and notification no. F.10(76)/85-Fin.(G) dated 14.11.1985 of Delhi Police being above the rank of Constable, however he himself did not note down the secret information in writing, rather made a call at about 10:05 pm to Inspector Ashish Dahima, informed him about the secret information and also made him talk with the secret informer on phone. At about 10:15 pm Inspector Ashish Dahima (PW-29) called him (ASI Rambir Singh) back and apprised him that ACP Sh. Raj Kumar Saha had given directions to constitute a raiding party and to take necessary action. Inspector Ashish Dahima (PW-29) has stated that after taking necessary instructions from ACP Sh. Raj Kumar Saha he lodged the secret information in CCTNS vide DD No. 143A (Ex. PW-15/B) at 22:49:39 hours.
70. In the present matter, the empowered officer who had first received the secret information did not note down the same in writing. It is contended by DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 127 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Ld. Addl. PP for the State that since ASI Rambir Singh was not in Police Station or office, rather on patrolling in the area, thus there was no opportunity for him to note down the secret information. To buttress his arguments, Ld. Addl. PP for the State relied on the case titled as Karnail Singh Vs. State of Haryana, (2009) 8 SCC 539 . It is further contended by Ld. Addl. PP for the State that in the present matter, recovery from accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh was made from a vehicle in transit, thus non-compliance of Section 42 NDPS Act is inconsequential as Section 43 NDPS Act would be attracted in respect of such recovery.
71. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Karnail Singh Vs. State of Haryana, (2009) 8 SCC 539 has dealt with this issue and observed as under: -
(a) The officer on receiving the information [of the nature referred to in sub-
section (1) of Section 42] from any person had to record it in writing in the register concerned and forthwith send a copy to his immediate official superior, before proceeding to take action in terms of clauses (a) to (d) of Section 42(1).
(b) But if the information was received when the officer was not in the police station, but while he was on the move either on patrol duty or otherwise, either by mobile phone, or other means, and the information calls for immediate action and any delay would have resulted in the goods or evidence being removed or destroyed, it would not be feasible or practical to take down in writing the information given to him, in such a situation, he could take action as per clauses (a) to (d) of Section 42(1) and thereafter, as soon as it is practical, record the information in writing and forthwith inform the same to the official superior.
(c) In other words, the compliance with the requirements of Sections 42(1) and 42(2) in regard to writing down the information received and sending a copy thereof to the superior officer, should normally precede the entry, search and seizure by the officer. But in special circumstances involving emergent situations, the recording of the information in DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 128 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act writing and sending a copy thereof to the official superior may get postponed by a reasonable period, that is, after the search, entry and seizure. The question is one of urgency and expediency.
(d) While total non-compliance with requirements of sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 42 is impermissible, delayed compliance with satisfactory explanation about the delay will be acceptable compliance with Section
42. To illustrate, if any delay may result in the accused escaping or the goods or evidence being destroyed or removed, not recording in writing the information received, before initiating action, or non- sending of a copy of such information to the official superior forthwith, may not be treated as violation of Section 42. But if the information was received when the police officer was in the police station with sufficient time to take action, and if the police officer fails to record in writing the information received, or fails to send a copy thereof, to the official superior, then it will be a suspicious circumstance being a clear violation of Section 42 of the Act. Similarly, where the police officer does not record the information at all, and does not inform the official superior at all, then also it will be a clear violation of Section 42 of the Act. Whether there is adequate or substantial compliance with Section 42 or not is a question of fact to be decided in each case."
72. In the case in hand, secret information was received by ASI Rambir Singh at 9:30 pm qua supply of contraband at about 10:30-11:00 pm. The secret information was of just three lines that 'three persons namely Noor Mohmmad, Ujjwal and Laxmi Singh are bringing ganja from Andhra Pradesh. They are in silver colour Innova car bearing no. AP35 H 3939. They will deliver ganja to one Rakaal at New Seemapuri between 10:30-11:00 pm.' From 9:30 pm when secret informer met ASI Rambir Singh till 10:05 pm when he called Inspector Ashish Dahima to inform him about the secret information, there was a gap of 35 minutes wherein above-stated three lines could have easily been recorded on a plain paper by ASI Rambir Singh who was carrying his IO bag, laptop as well as printer with him at that time. ASI Rambir Singh did not record any such information even after apprehension DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 129 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act and seizure proceedings. Thus, neither the requirement of Section 42 NDPS Act, nor the principles laid down in Karnail Singh's case (supra) were followed in the present matter.
73. The second question which needs determination in the present case is as to whether the present is a case where Section 42 of the Act can be said to have any application or it is covered under Section 43 of the NDPS Act.
Section 43 of the NDPS Act reads as under :-
"43. Power of seizure and arrest in public place.--
Any officer of any of the departments mentioned in section 42 may --
(a) seize in any public place or in transit, any narcotic drug or psychotropic sub-
stance or controlled substance in respect of which he has reason to believe an of- fence punishable under this Act has been committed, and, along with such drug or substance, any animal or conveyance or article liable to confiscation under this Act, any document or other article which he has reason to believe may furnish ev- idence of the commission of an offence punishable under this Act or any docu- ment or other article which may furnish evidence of holding any illegally acquired property which is liable for seizure or freezing or forfeiture under Chapter VA of this Act;
(b) detain and search any person whom he has reason to believe to have committed an offence punishable under this Act, and if such person has any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance or controlled substance in his possession and such possession appears to him to be unlawful, arrest him and any other person in his company.
Explanation:-- For the purposes of this section, the expression "public place" includes any public conveyance, hotel, shop, or other place intended for use by, or accessible to, the public."
74. Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, in the case of Mandeep Kaur Vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M-27760/2021), held that another material distinction between search of a building, conveyance or enclosed place DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 130 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act conducted under provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act and a search of a vehicle in 'transit' in terms of Section 43 of the Act is that in case of search of a vehicle in transit, there is no requirement of obtaining any search warrant even if search is conducted after sunset by a non-gazetted officer unlike a case of search of a building, conveyance or an enclosed place.
75. In the case in hand, at the time when the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh were apprehended, they were coming in a Innova car which was intercepted by the police and ganja was recovered from the same, thus the private conveyance of the accused persons was in transit at the time of alleged recovery. Considering that the recovery of contraband has been affected from a vehicle which was in 'transit' in a public place, Section 43 and proviso to Section 42 of the Act would get attracted with regard to the recovery of contraband from the accused persons at the spot. (Reliance in this regard can also be placed on the case titled as Imran Ali @ Samir Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi decided by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi DOD 05.06.2025.
76. Even if proceedings U/s 42 NDPS Act were not required to be done in the present matter as recovery was from a vehicle in 'transit', however the proceedings conducted by the police after receipt of secret information are material for the present matter as the police officials identified the vehicle, identified & apprehended the accused persons and seized the case property on the basis of that secret information. It is not a case of simple chance recovery at DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 131 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act a picket, but police officials laid a trap on the basis of secret information to apprehend the accused persons. There are following discrepancies in the present matter qua receipt of secret information and consequent apprehension of accused persons which raises doubts qua story of the prosecution:-
(i) Despite having sufficient time, ASI Rambir Singh (PW-6) did not note down the secret information on a plain paper prior to conducting search and seizure. The phone calls between ASI Rambir Singh and Inspector Ashish Dahima could not be proved on record to establish, if they had communicated about the secret information at the alleged time.
(ii) As per version of ASI Rambir Singh (PW-6) as well as all the other members of patrolling party present with him, the secret informer had never met anyone of them earlier, all of them were in civil dress at public place and the vehicle used by them was also a private vehicle having no sign or sticker of Delhi Police. In such circumstances, a question arises how the secret informer identified the members of patrolling party without previously meeting them. It is contended by Ld. Addl. PP for the State that it might be possible that members of patrolling party were not knowing the secret informer, however the secret informer might be knowing the members of the patrolling party.
There is nothing came in the testimony of the patrolling party, if the secret informer had apprised them how he (secret informer) identified that they were police officials. Thus, the best argument of Ld. Addl. PP is that it was a coincidence that secret informer identified the police officials and informed DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 132 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act them about supply of huge quantity of ganja which was going to take place after an hour or so.
(iii) There is a lady accused i.e. Laxmi Singh in the present matter. Coincidentally police patrolling team was also having a lady police official i.e. W/HC Pooja. The undersigned has seen a number of charge-sheets in NDPS Act and has hardly come across lady police official in patrolling party of Crime Branch in 1-2% cases. None of the member of patrolling party could tell, if W/HC Pooja was involved in raid of any other case with them. W/HC Pooja was dropped from list of witnesses by prosecution; thus, she could not be cross- examined about her involvement in patrolling and raid in other NDPS Act cases. Thus, it was also a coincidence that the patrolling party was having a lady Head Constable to conduct personal search of a lady accused in a case where secret informer apprised that patrolling party qua supply of contraband by certain accused persons involving a lady.
(iv) As per secret information received the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh were coming from Andhra Pradesh and would be going to supply ganja at New Seemapuri. No exact route of coming from Andhra Pradesh and going to New Seemapuri has been mentioned. All the members of patrolling party have stated that there was an another route from which accused persons could have taken their car to New Seemapuri, though it is stated that the said route was a congested one, due to which the patrolling party laid trap and took position about 10-15 meters ahead DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 133 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act of gate of J&K Pocket, New Seemapuri. Coincidentally accused persons came on that route and were apprehended by the police. It is also to be noted that there was no reason for the police to assume that accused persons would come from apsara border side towards New Seemapuri. Accused persons could have taken some other route to enter Delhi and reach New Seemapuri, but coincidentally they reached the exact spot where police were waiting for them.
To cover-up this lacuna members of raiding party had stated that the secret informer apprised them the exact route whereby the accused persons would have been coming. However, the fact that the exact route was apprised by secret informer is not mentioned in DD No. 143A which was the first document prepared in the present matter. Neither the said fact was mentioned in the rukka, nor in the statement U/s 161 Cr.P.C. of any of the member of patrolling party.
(v) Though, the police officials in the present case found a GPS tracker connected with the Innova car recovered from the accused persons, however no location chart of the GPS tracker of the Innova car has been filed on record to show the path of the Innova car and to corroborate the story of police that the accused persons directly came to the spot of recovery in that car.
(vi) The raiding party recovered a mobile phone having SIM No. 8826671401 from accused Laxmi Singh; a mobile phone having SIM numbers 9692148466 and 9060891657 was recovered from accused Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo and a mobile phone having SIM No. 6370798464 was recovered from DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 134 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act accused Ujjwal Kumar. CDRs of these mobile numbers have been filed on record. Analyses of the same bring-forth following facts:-
(a) CDR of mobile no. 6370798464 is only till 14.11.2022.
(b) CDR of mobile no. 9060891657 is only till 27.08.2022.
(c) CDR of mobile no. 9692148466 is only till 17.11.2022.
There is no explanation as to why CDRs of the above-stated mobile numbers after 17.11.2022 are not filed on record.
(d) CDR of mobile no. 8826671401 recovered from accused Laxmi Singh is till 19.11.2022. As per this CDR, on 19.11.2022 at around 9:20 am this mobile phone was in Madhya Pradesh (AIR MP). At 4:18 pm (16:18) this mobile phone was in western Uttar Pradesh (AIR UPW). This mobile phone remained in AIR UPW till 5:55 pm (17:55). At 7:10 pm (19:10:32) this mobile phone was in Delhi (AIR DL). Thereafter, till 8:30 pm (20:30) this phone remained in Delhi. There is no CDR thereafter of this mobile number.
Thus, from CDR location of the mobile phone in possession of accused Laxmi Singh, it is clear that the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh have entered Delhi from western U.P. by 19:10:32 (7:10 pm). The accused persons in the present case were arrested at New Seemapuri at 11:20 pm. There is no investigation, no explanation as to where the accused persons were for almost four hours after entering Delhi. There are 3-4 ways to enter Delhi from western U.P. The farthest from the place of recovery is from Noida, Mayur Vihar side, which is only 20 minutes' drive from the place of recovery. Other entry points e.g. Bhopra Border and Gazipur Border are even closer, Apsara boarder from which DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 135 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act accused persons entered Delhi as per prosecution case is hardly at a distance of 5 minutes ride from spot of recovery.
(vii) Apart from that there are following lacunae as well in the recovery proceedings :-
(a) There is no videography or photography of the search, arrest or recovery proceedings was clicked/ made. No CCTV footage qua presence of the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh at the time and place of arrest or their movement towards the spot of arrest has been filed on record.
(b) There is discrepancy qua spot of recovery as well, as PW-1 stated that Red Cross Hospital was visible from the place where they took position for the raid. Similarly stated by PW-6 ASI Rambir Singh and PW-32 retired ACP Raj Kumar Saha, whereas as per version of PW-20 HC Rajeev and PW-30 HC Prince, Red Cross Hospital was not visible from the spot.
There is contradiction in the testimonies of the police witnesses qua near which gate of J&K Pocket they took position for the raid. It is stated by PW-32 retired ACP Raj Kumar Saha and PW-35 SI Monu Chauhan that they were near the first gate. It is stated by PW-20 HC Rajeev that accused persons were apprehended after crossing the second gate of J&K Pocket, while it is stated by PW-30 HC Prince that they took position at some distance from second gate of J&K Pocket.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 136 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
(c) In the statements U/s 161 Cr.P.C. of all the raiding team members as well as in the rukka, it is mentioned that Innova car i.e. vehicle recovered from accused persons was sighted for the first time at 11:20 pm and was stopped at 11:25 pm i.e. after five minutes. The vehicle involved i.e. Innova car, must have been in good condition since coming from Andhra Pradesh to Delhi. The time of apprehension is around 11:20 pm when generally there remain no traffic on the road. In such circumstances, the vehicle would have covered substantial distance at least 1-2 Kms in those five minutes. There is no explanation as to how much distance was covered by the said car in those five minutes between sighting of the car and stopping of the car by the police. Infact, in normal condition it is not possible to sight and identify a car from a distance of 01 Km.
(d) It is stated by members of the raiding party that ASI Rambir Singh (PW-6) asked few passersby to join the investigation, however police failed to join and did not even sincerely try to join any public witness. Though, it is a fact that generally public persons do not became part of police proceedings or investigation, more so in a case of Narcotic Drugs. This inaction on the part of the police raises doubt qua time and place of recovery as stated by the police.
Non-joining of public witness during the proceedings, raises serious doubt as regards the recovery made from the accused. In this regard, reliance can be placed upon judgment titled as Bantu Vs. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi (Bail Appl. No.2287/22 dtd.08.07.2024 of Hon'ble Delhi High Court).
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 137 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Thus, in the present matter, it can be safely held that sincere and sufficient efforts were not made by the police party to join the independent witness in the investigation. Further, the testimonies of the police officials suffer from material contradiction as stated above, which raises serious doubt qua their version of recovery from the alleged place and time.
77. Considering the facts that there are a number of coincidences in the story of prosecution which led to the apprehension and recovery of ganja from accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh, coupled with the fact that the accused Laxmi Singh who as per prosecution story accompanying the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo and Ujjwal Kumar from Andhra Pradesh had entered Delhi with all the accused persons in the Innova car at 7:20 pm and there is no investigation or explanation where the accused persons remained in Delhi for four hours till their apprehension, coupled with the facts that there is no videography or photography, CCTV footage; no public witness of the recovery proceedings, raises serious doubts qua raid and recovery proceedings conducted in the present matter. Hence, in the present matter, apprehension of the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh in the Innova car having in their possession huge quantity of ganja at the time and place alleged by the police appears to be doubtful.
Discussion on the point of compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 138 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
78. Section 50 NDPS Act is as under :-
"Conditions under which search of persons shall be conducted.
(1) When any officer duly authorised under section 42 is about to search any person under the provisions of section 41, section 42 or section 43, he shall, if such person so requires, take such person without unnecessary delay to nearest Gazetted Officer of any of the departments mentioned in section 42 or to the nearest Magistrate.
(2) If such requisition is made, the officer may detain the person until he can bring him before the Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate referred to in sub-section (1). (3) The Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate before whom any such person is brought shall, if he sees no reasonable ground for search, forthwith discharge the person but otherwise shall direct that search be made.
(4) No female shall be searched by anyone excepting a female. (5) When an officer duly authorised under section 42 has reason to believe that it is not possible to take the person to be searched to the nearest Gazetted Officer or Magistrate without the possibility of the person to be searched parting with possession of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, or controlled substance or article or document, he may, instead of taking such person to the nearest Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, proceed to search the person as provided under section100 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974). (6) After a search is conducted under sub-section (5), the officer shall record the reasons for such belief which necessitated such search and within seventy-two hours send a copy thereof to his immediate official superior."
(emphasis supplied)
79. As per prosecution case, after apprehension of the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh, they were served with the mandatory notices under Section 50 of the NDPS Act and even after their refusal ACP Raj Kumar Saha was called at the spot on whose instructions personal search of the accused persons were conducted, however nothing was recovered from their personal search. As regards recovery made from bags carried by accused persons in their car is concerned, it has been observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the provisions of Section 50 NDPS Act do not apply to recoveries other than those made from the person of the accused DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 139 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act persons. Reliance placed on the cases titled as Saikou Jabbi Vs. State of Maharashtra, MANU/SC/0991/2003 and State of Punjab Vs. Baljinder Singh, 2019 INSC 1145 .
80. Section 57 of the NDPS Act which requires that :-
"Whenever any person makes any arrest or seizure, under this Act, he shall, within forty-eight hours next after such arrest or seizure, make a full report of all the particulars of such arrest or seizure to his immediate official superior."
81. In the present matter, the special reports U/s 57 NDPS Act were prepared by ASI Rambir Singh and SI Monu Chauhan. The same are duly proved on record as Ex. PW-15/C, Ex. PW-15/D, Ex. PW-15/F, Ex. PW-15/H, Ex. PW-15/J & Ex. PW-15/L. Accordingly, in the opinion of the Court the provisions of Section 57 of the NDPS Act were duly complied with by the Investigating Agency in the facts of the present case.
Discussion on the point of compliance of Sections 52A & 55 NDPS Act
82. As a matter of fact, in the present case the sampling proceedings were conducted before the Ld. Magistrate U/s 52A of the NDPS Act. The said proceedings were admitted during trial by all the accused persons. The said proceedings were conducted by Sh. Bharat Aggarwal, Ld. MM on 13.12.2022 and 15.12.2022 (Ex. AD-1 and Ex. AD-2). The photographs of the said proceedings are also on record alongwith certificate U/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act, the same are also not disputed. The Ld. MM conducted DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 140 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act in the present matter in respect of contraband recovered from accused Azad @ Rakal (since deceased) on 13.12.2022 and in respect of contraband recovered from accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh on 15.12.2022.
83. Though, in the present case, there is compliance of Section 52A NDPS Act, as the sampling proceedings were done by Ld. MM, however there are following discrepancies in the investigation qua safe handling of the case property and the samples which raises doubts qua proper handling of the case property in the present matter:-
(i) The case property allegedly recovered from accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh was sealed with the seal of 'RS' by PW-6 ASI Rambir Singh at the spot and was later on counter-sealed by substitute SHO Inspector Govind Singh Chauhan (PW-27) with the seal of 'RS'. Interestingly, as per proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act these case properties reached Ld. MM on 15.12.2022 with the seal of 'MC' and 'RS' as apparent from admitted proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act dated 15.11.2022 exhibited on record Ex. AD-2.
(ii) IO SI Monu Chauhan tried to explain this discrepancy by stating that after completion of proceedings he had moved an application before Ld. MM Sh. Bharat Aggarwal to correct this mistake as it is claimed by the police that proceedings qua accused Azad @ Rakal had taken place on 13.12.2022 and DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 141 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.FIR No. 270/2022
(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act apparently the said proceedings were copy-pasted at the time of proceedings in respect of accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh. Copy of application moved in this respect dated 22.12.2022 is filed on record as Mark-35A wherein a request was made to the Ld. MM for correction in the order dated 15.12.2022 regarding inadvertent mentioning of seal of MC instead of seal of 'RS' on the parcels. However, the said application was dismissed by Ld. MM, copy of the dismissal order is Ex. PW-3/J.
(iii) The undersigned has perused register no.19 of the present matter and has found that in register no.19 qua case property recovered from accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh, there is mention of only one seal 'RS' at the time of deposit of case property. There is no mention that there were two seals of 'RS' on the case property. The undersigned has also perused the photographs of the proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act taken place on 15.12.2022, however the undersigned could not place any seal on the case property from which the undersigned could reach a conclusion that the case properties were bearing seals of 'RS' and 'RS' as claimed by the police.
In such circumstances, in view of the law that proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act forms primary evidence, the undersigned has no other option, but to rely upon the observation made by Ld. MM on 15.12.2022 in respect of case properties recovered from accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh that the said case properties was bearing seals DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 142 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act of 'MC' and 'RS'.
(iv) It is claimed by PW-27 Inspector Govind Chauhan that on 20.11.2022 he was looking after the work of SHO, P.S. Crime Branch namely Inspector Ranvir Singh who was on leave. It is also claimed by him that he has affixed his counter-seal having initials 'RS' on the case property. In his cross- examination it is stated by him that he has three types of seals, one with the initial 'GS'; another with the initial 'GC' as his complete name is Govind Singh Chauhan and one more with the initials 'RS'. There is no reason stated by him as to why he was having seal of 'RS' with him when his name or designation or any other thing does not match with the initials 'RS'. He could not tell particulars of any other case wherein he would have used the seal of 'RS'. It is also stated by him that all these seals were got prepared by him privately.
The falsity on the part of PW-27 Inspector Govind Chauhan came to fore on analyses of testimony of MHC(M) ASI Mukesh Kumar (PW-18) who stated that the seal of 'RS' used by Inspector Govind Chauhan was belonging to Inspector Ranvir Singh who was on leave on that day. It is also stated by him that Inspector Govind Chauhan has joined Crime Branch on temporary basis due to leave of Inspector Ranvir Singh and during that period, Inspector Govind Chauhan used the seal of 'RS' belonging to Inspector Ranvir Singh.
(v) PW-18 ASI Mukesh Kumar who was working as MHC(M), Crime Branch on 20.11.2022 has deposed that on 20.11.2022 at 6:00 am Inspector Govind Chauhan deposited five sealed parcels bearing seals of 'MC' and 'RS'.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 143 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act Thus, apart from the proceedings U/s 52A NDPS Act, this prosecution witness has also stated that the case properties recovered from accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh were bearing seals of 'MC' and 'RS', not 'RS' and 'RS', as claimed by the prosecution.
Thus, there are serious doubts qua recovery of case property at the alleged time and place, effected by raiding team headed by ASI Rambir Singh and there are serious doubts qua safe custody of the case property in the present case. Hence, chances of tampering cannot be ruled out in the present matter as there are obvious discrepancies in handling and preserving the case property.
84. In view of the above-stated circumstances, particularly the doubts qua apprehension and recovery of the case property at the time and place as alleged by the prosecution, as also obvious discrepancies in handling and preserving the case property, the prosecution has failed to prove the foundational facts against the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh beyond reasonable doubt. The presumption under Sections 35 and 54 of the NDPS Act cannot be raised in this case against the accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh, as the recovery of contraband could not be established beyond reasonable doubt. In such circumstances, charges against accused Rajender Kumar Nayak (owner of the Innova car bearing no. AP35 H 3939) qua offence U/s 25 & 29 NDPS Act and charges against accused Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey U/s 29 NDPS Act qua recovery of case property from DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 144 of 145 SC No. 145/2023 STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh, could not be established.
In the present matter, separate recovery was shown to be made from house of accused Azad @ Rakal, but there is no evidence to connect the present accused persons with the said stack of contraband. Further, there are discrepancies qua issuance of search warrant in respect of said recovery.
Conclusion
85. In the present matter, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the recovery effected from accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh, nor the case property was kept in due custody. In the opinion of the Court, it cannot be said beyond doubt that there is no material contradiction in the story of the prosecution. Therefore, in the opinion of the Court, the benefit of doubt would go in favour of the accused persons.
86. Accordingly, accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar, Laxmi Singh, Devender @ Satrughan @ Pandey and Rajender Kumar Nayak for the offences punishable U/s 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act; accused Rajender Kumar Nayak for the offences punishable U/s 25 NDPS Act and accused persons namely Noor Mohmmad @ Babloo, Ujjwal Kumar and Laxmi Singh for the offences punishable U/s 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act, are acquitted. Accused persons are directed to furnish bail bonds in compliance of Section 481 BNSS (earlier Section 437-A Cr.P.C.), as per rules.
DLSH 01-003030-2023 Page 145 of 145 SC No. 145/2023STATE Vs. NOOR MOHMMAD @ BABLOO & ORS.
FIR No. 270/2022(Crime Branch) U/s 20(b)(ii)(C)/25 & 29 r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) NDPS Act
87. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Digitally
Announced in the open Court GAJENDER signed by
SINGH GAJENDER
SINGH
NAGAR
on 25th April, 2026 NAGAR
(Gajender Singh Nagar)
Special Judge (NDPS Act)
District Shahdara
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi