Punjab-Haryana High Court
Santokh Singh vs State Of Punjab on 17 January, 2012
Author: Sabina
Bench: Jasbir Singh, Sabina
Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 1-
Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008
Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
(1) Criminal Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008
Date of Decision: 17.1.2012.
Santokh Singh .......Appellant
Vs.
State of Punjab ......Respondent
(2) Criminal Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008
Major Singh .......Appellant
Vs.
State of Punjab ......Respondent
(3) Criminal Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011
Mastan Singh .......Appellant
Vs.
State of Punjab ......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Ms. Gurjeet Kaur, Advocate
for the appellant.
(In CRA No. 426-DB of 2008)
Mr. H.S.Rakhra, Advocate
for the appellant.
(In CRA No. 439-DB of 2008)
Ms. Anju Arora, Advocate
for the appellant.
(In CRA No. 1203-DB of 2011)
Ms. Manjari Nehru Kaul, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
.....
SABINA, J.
Vide this judgment, the above mentioned three Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 2- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 appeals would be disposed of as these have arisen out of the common incident/judgment.
Inspector Gurdarshan Singh sent a ruqa to Police Station Sangat on 26.8.2005 at 11.10 A.M. stating therein that he was present on main road bus stand in the revenue limits of village Doomwali along with other police officials. He had received a secret information that Mastan Singh alias Mana alias Haji and Major Singh had formed an international gang for bringing counterfeit currency, narcotic substances and weapons in bulk from Pakistan to supply the same to bad elements in northern India. The said persons would be crossing the border of Bathinda in Santro Car No. DL-1CH-6713.
On the basis of the said ruqa, formal FIR No. 117 dated 26.8.2005 was registered under Section 489-A, 489-B, 489-C of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 18, 22 Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('Act' for short) at Police Station, Sangat by Assistant Sub Inspector Harbans Singh.
Thereafter, Inspector Gurdarshan Singh along with other police officials held a picket near Nar Singh Colony at some distance from the main road. At about 12.15 P.M., Santro Car No. DL-1CH-6713 came from Dabwali side. The said car was signaled to stop. On inquiry, the driver disclosed his name as Major Singh whereas the other person, sitting by the side of the driver, disclosed his name as Mastan Singh. On personal search of Mastan Singh counterfeit currency notes to the tune of ` 1,00,000/- i.e. 200 notes in denomination of ` 500/- each were recovered. The said currency notes were put in an envelope and Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 3- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 the same was sealed with seal bearing impression 'GS'. The numbers of the currency notes were also noted down and these were taken in possession vide memo Ex. PW4/A. Sample seal was separately prepared.
On personal search of accused Major Singh, counterfeit currency notes to the tune of ` 67,000/- i.e. in the denomination of ` 500/- each were recovered from his shirt pocket. The currency notes were put in an envelope and was sealed with sealed bearing impression 'GS'. The numbers of the counterfeit currency notes were noted down and were taken in possession vide memo Ex. PW4/B. The accused were arrested after disclosing to them the grounds of arrest. On interrogation, both the accused disclosed qua involvement of accused Santokh Singh who had contacted them on mobile phone. They further disclosed that Santokh Singh was standing at the bus stand. On pointing out by the accused Major Singh and Mastan Singh, accused Santokh Singh was apprehended. On personal search of accused Santokh Singh, one counterfeit currency note of ` 500/- was recovered . The same was taken in possession vide memo Ex. PW4/G after making it into a sealed envelope with seal bearing impression 'GS'. Accused Santokh Singh was arrested after disclosing to him the grounds of arrest.
On 03.9.2005, during interrogation, accused suffered disclosure statements. Accused Mastan Singh stated that he had kept concealed one packet of one kilogram heroin and offered to get the same recovered. On the basis of the said statement, reduced into writing, he got recovered heroin from the Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 4- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 disclosed place.
During interrogation, accused Major Singh suffered a disclosure statement that he had kept concealed 500 grams of heroin and offered to get the same recovered. On the basis of the said statement, reduced into writing, he got recovered half kilogram heroin from the disclosed place.
Accused Santokh Singh also suffered a disclosure statement during interrogation and offered to get recovered half kilogram of heroin from the disclosed place. On the basis of the statement of the said accused, reduced into writing, he got recovered half kilogram heroin from the disclosed place.
Out of the heroin, recovered on the basis of the disclosure statements suffered by the accused, two samples of 10 grams each were drawn. The samples as well as the remaining heroin, recovered from each of the accused, were made into sealed parcels.
On 04.9.2005, all the three accused along with the case property were produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda and the following order was passed:-
"Heard. Bulk parcels of heroin weighing 1 kg. and two 500 gm. each and six sample parcels each weighing 10 gm are produced before me. Seals "GS"
are intact. 10 gm of heroin is taken out of each bulk parcel containing bulk heroin. Sample parcels and remaining heroin 970 gm. and two parcels of 470 gm. each is sealed with seal in this Court bearing impression 'GS' 'RM' CJM. Photographs of the parcel have been taken by Naib Singh of Mehboob Studio, Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 5- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 Court Road, Bathinda. Sample of 10 grams and parcel sealed with seal bearing impression 'GS' and remaining heroin 970 gm. and two parcels of 470 gm. each are allowed to be disposed of under Section 52 (A) of NDPS Act prescribing the manner for disposal of case property as per circular order No. 9 dt A.D.G.P. Crime, Punjab, dated 31.5.2001 relating to the functions of Drugs Disposal Committee." The case property was deposited with Incharge, NDPS Godown, Bathinda by Inspector Gurdarshan Singh. He retained three sample parcels bearing seal impression 'GS' and three sample parcels, drawn out vide court orders, bearing seal impression 'RM' CJM, in his safe custody in the police station.
On 07.9.2005, Inspector Gurdarshan Singh sent above said six samples to Chemical Examiner, Patiala through Head Constable Raghvir Singh and he deposited the same on 09.9.2005. On receipt of report of chemical examiner and completion of other formalities, challan was presented against the accused.
During trial, prosecution examined 06 witnesses in order to prove its case.
After the close of prosecution evidence, appellant Mastan Singh when examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.' for short), pleaded as under:-
"I am innocent and nothing incriminating was recovered from my possession nor I have any concern with car no. DL-1CH-6713 nor do I drive a Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 6- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 car. I am a junk dealer. ON 26.8.2005 at 9.00 a.m. I was picked up by the police from Killianwali Bus Stand, Dabwali when I was going to Malout in connection with a deal for purchase of junk and the police brought me to Dabwali Chowk where Major Singh my co accused, who belongs to my village of my in-laws, and I requested the police personnel to inform Major Singh about my arrest but the police personnel even tried to manhandle Major Singh and they came to blows and the police also arrested Major Singh. I have been falsely implicated in this case due to party faction by some persons with whom we have civil litigation pending in court."
Appellant Major Singh when examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., pleaded as under:-
"Case is falsely planted against me. On 26.8.05 at about 9.00 am I reached at Dabwali along with Thakar Singh son of kartar Singh, Sohan Lal son of Chaman Lal Soni. Said Soni came to Dabwali to see his daughter, but Thakar Singh came for fetching luggage for installation of tubewell. I stopped in wait of bus on a crossing at Dabwali from where busses goes to side of Sirsa and Bathinda etc. Persons of Punjab Police in Civil Uniform came there when I was standing on Punjab side in area of Dabwali. There Mastan Singh disclosed police persons as if Major Singh that is myself is the person standing there. He Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 7- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 also disclosed as if my village is same as that of Mastan Singh. Said Mastan Singh disclosed my name as Major Singh with intention that I will give intimation of his being nabbed by Punjab Police at his house because in-laws house of Mastan Singh is in my village. That police party consisted of Inspector Gurdarshan Singh and other police officials. I was holding Pepsi Cold Drink in my hand and those police officials grappled with me and threw that cold drink after taking it from my house. When those police officials were grappling with me then they disclosed me as if I will have to accompany them because they are Punjab Police Officials. I disclosed my address as Village Fatehpur, P.s. Sangria. I also disclosed as if number of my Police Station is 220076. Thereafter, those Punjab Police Officials contacted said Police Station and therefrom got intimation as if I am History Sheeter of that Police Station and has enmity with many persons and that I have committed murders. Those police officials called upon Punjab Police Officials to entangle me in case it is so possible and they assured to get provided help from my adversaries namely Shaukat Ali and Mushtaq Ali. Allegations of murder of father of Shaukat Ali and Mushtaq Ali was leveled against me and those Mushtaq Ali and Shaukat Ali has their maternal grandparents house near Bathinda. Punjab Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 8- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 Police officials entangled me in this case falsely in connivance with Shaukat Ali and Mushtaq Ali because Punjab Police officials wanted to have revenge from me for allegedly misbehaving with them. I have no connection or relationship or concern with Mastan Singh. I came from Jail of Hanumangarh about two months prior to my nabbing. Thakar Singh informed at my house as if I have grappled with Punjab Police Officials and that is why I have been taken by Punjab Police. None of those relatives came in contact with me. No recovery has been effected from me and nor I have any concern with any of the co accused. I do not know driving and nor I holds any license of driving. No car ever recovered from me. No counterfeit currency notes were ever recovered from me and nor any contraband was ever recovered from me. I have never seen any contraband throughout during my life."
Appellant Santokh Singh when examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., pleaded as under:-
"I am innocent and nothing incrimination was recovered from my possession nor I have any concern with car No. DL-1CH-6713 nor do I drive a car. I am a tractor mechanic and I was running a workshop at bus stand of Vill. Ghubaya, Tehsil Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 9- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 Jalalabad, District Ferozepur and I used to earn my livelihood by repairing tractors.
I was picked up by the police of PS Sangat from my workshop at about 5.00 pm on 26.8.2005 in the presence of my wife Surinder Kaur and shopkeepers namely Vicky and Baldev Singh and others and at that time Jagdish Singh Panch, Nambardar Surjit Singh, who had come there for repair of their tractors and Balwant Singh and Desa Singh of my village were also present. I have been falsely implicated in this case due to party faction at the instance of Khushal Singh son of Sham Singh and Jaswant Singh son of Resham Singh of my village as civil litigation is pending between us in Courts. In this regard my wife had moved application to higher authorities."
The appellants examined 07 witnesses in their defence.
The trial court vide judgment/order dated 04.6.2008/06.6.2008 convicted and sentenced the appellants for commission of offence under Section 22 of the Act and 489-B, 489-C/34 IPC.
It has been submitted on behalf of the appellants by their counsels that prosecution had failed to prove its case. The appellants had been falsely involved in this case. There was no report from the Government Press that the currency notes were fake. The prosecution had failed to establish the ownership of Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 10- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 the car and how it had come in possession of the appellants. The appellants had not been apprised of their right before their search that they could get the search effected in the presence of a gazetted officer or a Magistrate. Independent witness Bhola Singh, who was a stock witness of the prosecution, had not been examined during trial. The investigating officer had failed to deposit the case property in the malkhana. The recovery of contraband had been falsely foisted on the appellants as the same had been effected from an open and accessible place with no identification mark. No information had been sent to the superior officers qua receipt of secret information against the appellants. Head Constable Raghvir Singh, who had taken the samples for chemical analysis, had retained the same with himself for two days without any explanation. Only one sample seal had been prepared at the spot.
Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that heavy recovery of fake currency had been effected from the appellants Major Singh and Mastan Singh. On the basis of their statements, appellant Santokh Singh was apprehended. During interrogation, all the appellants suffered disclosure statements and got recovered heavy quantity of heroin. The appellants were professional criminal and had stored contraband at different places.
After hearing the learned counsels for the appellants and the learned State counsel and going through the record available on the file carefully, we are of the opinion that the instant appeals deserve dismissal.
In the present case, Inspector Gurdarshan Singh had Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 11- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 sent a ruqa on 26.8.2005 at 11.10 A.M. for registration of FIR to the police station on receipt of secret information that appellants Mastan Singh and Major Singh were travelling in a car carrying counterfeit currency notes, narcotic substance and weapons. Thereafter, a picket was held in Nar Singh Colony, village Doomwali. At about 12.15 P.M., appellants Mastan Singh and Major Singh were apprehended while travelling in Santro Car No. DL-1CH-6713. The car was being driven by appellant Major Singh and appellant Mastan Singh was sitting on the seat next to that of the driver. On search, 200 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of ` 500/- were recovered from appellant Mastan Singh and 134 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of ` 500/- were recovered from appellant Major Singh. On their statements, appellant Santokh Singh was apprehended from the bus stand and from him, one counterfeit currency note in the denomination of ` 500/- was recovered.
PW-2 Sham Sunder Bhatia deposed that on 24.10.2005, while posted as Deputy Manager (Cash) with State Bank of India, Bathinda, he had checked 335 notes in the denomination of ` 500/- produced before him by the police of Police Station Sangat along with an application. On checking the said notes, he found that they were not genuine and he gave his report in this regard Ex. PW2/B. PW-6 Sub Inspector Ajit Singh deposed that on 24.10.2005, he had approached Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Bathinda for getting the information qua genuineness of the currency notes in question.
Thus, as per PW-2, the currency notes recovered from Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 12- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 the appellants were found to be fake. A perusal of the record reveals that the currency notes were duly sent to the Press for opinion qua their genuineness. Currency Note Press, Nashik Road (Maharashtra State) vide report dated 27.9.2006 reported that the suspected notes were counterfeit notes. The reasons given were that the main water mark, security thread were imitated. The thickness of the paper was more than genuine note paper. Ink shades did not match with the printing colours. The colour registration was not correct. The numbering was also not as per genuine note. The said report could have been led in evidence without examining the concerned officer as per Section 292 Cr.P.C. The prosecution has either deliberately or due to inadvertence failed to exhibit the report of the printing press on record though it was a very material document. Since the report is available on the file, the same can be taken in consideration to substantiate the testimony of PW-2. Thus, the learned trial court rightly held that the appellants were found in possession of heavy fake currency notes for using the same as genuine.
During interrogation, on 03.9.2005, the appellants suffered disclosure statements and got recovered heroin from the disclosed places. Appellant Major Singh got recovered half kilogram of heroin from the disclosed place whereas appellant Mastan Singh got recovered one kilogram of heroin from the disclosed place. Appellant Santokh Singh got recovered half kilogram of heroin from the disclosed place. The appellants along with the recovered heroin were produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate on the next day i.e. 04.9.2005. The Chief Judicial Magistrate drew another sample of 10 grams contraband Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 13- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 from each parcel of recovered heroin and ordered that the remaining bulk case property be disposed of as per rules. Inspector Gurdarshan Singh has deposed that he had deposited the bulk heroin with Incharge, NDPS Godown, Bathinda and had kept the sample parcels in his safe custody. On 07.9.2005, he gave these sample parcels to Head Constable Raghvir Singh for depositing the same with the Chemical Examiner, Patiala and he deposited the same on 09.9.2005. In this regard, PW-1 Raghvir Singh has tendered his affidavit as Ex. PA.
Ex. PW-5/L is the report of the chemical laboratory. A perusal of the same reveals that these samples were received by it on 09.9.2005 with seals intact. Three samples weighing 10 grams were bearing seal impressions 'GS' whereas three parcels weighing 10 grams each were sealed with seal bearing impressions 'RM/CJM. After examining the samples, information was given by Assistant Chemical Examiner to Punjab Government, Patiala that the contents of the six samples were heroin. Thus, the samples which had been drawn by the Magistrate, were sent for chemical analysis to the laboratory and it was reported after examination by the said laboratory that the contents of the said samples were heroin. Since the samples were received in the laboratory with seals intact, it rules out the possibility that the same had been tampered with. The fact that the samples were deposited by PW-1 Raghvir Singh after two days does not lead to the inference that they had been tampered with. Ex. PA is the affidavit of PW-1 Head Constable Raghvir Singh wherein he has deposed that till the parcels remained in his possession, he did not allow anybody to tamper with the Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 14- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 same.
The police officials were acting in discharge of their official duties and had no reason to falsely involve the appellants in this case as they had no ill will or enmity against them. It is well settled that the statements of the witnesses are not to be doubted or discarded merely on the basis of their official status. In case the statements of the witnesses inspire confidence, they can be relied upon without seeking any independent corroboration.
Since no contraband was recovered from the appellants at the time of their apprehension, the fact that their consent for their search as required under Section 50 of the Act was not taken, loses its significance. In the present case, the contraband was got recovered by the appellants on the basis of their disclosure statements on 03.9.2005 though the recovery of counterfeit currency notes was effected from the appellants on 26.8.2005.
Bhola Singh was joined during recovery of heroin on the basis of disclosure statements suffered by the appellants but he was not examined as a witness during trial and was given up as having been won over by the accused on 12.12.2007. The statement of PW-5 investigating officer qua recovery of heroin on the basis of disclosure statements suffered by the appellants, is duly corroborated by PW-3 Assistant Sub Inspector Sukhpal Singh. The statement of the said witnesses are trustworthy and inspire confidence. There is no reason to discard their testimonies qua recovery of heroin from the appellants on the basis of their disclosure statements.
Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 15-Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 In the present case, the recoveries were effected from open places which were accessible to all and as such, provisions of Section 42 of the Act are not applicable to the facts of the present case. There is also no force in the argument raised by learned counsels for the appellants that the places from where the recoveries were alleged to have been effected were not identifiable. The appellants had kept concealed the contraband recovered on the basis of their disclosure statements. The said places of recovery were pointed out by the appellants. The fact that no mark of identification had been fixed on the place of recovery fails to advance the case of the appellants. It appears that the appellants were professional criminals and had kept the contraband hidden in open places to their exclusive knowledge and the contraband was got recovered by them on the basis of their disclosure statements suffered by them during interrogation.
There is also no force in the argument raised by the learned counsels for the appellants that only one sample seal had been proved on record and the said fact was fatal to the prosecution case. PW-5, in his cross examination, admitted that sample seal relating to recovery of accused Santokh Singh and Major Singh were not available on the file. This lapse, in itself, is not fatal to the prosecution case which is otherwise duly proved on record. The recoveries of counterfeit currency notes as well as heroin stand duly proved on record by the official witnesses. The accused were produced before the Magistrate along with the recovered heroin and samples were again drawn from each parcel of heroin by the Magistrate to rule out the possibility of Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 16- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 tampering.
In the present case, none of the appellants claimed ownership qua the car in question nor anybody got the car released on sapurdari. Vide order dated 06.6.2008, the trial court ordered that the car be confiscated to the state. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the fact that the investigating agency had failed to collect evidence qua ownership of the car, is not fatal to the prosecution case as the prosecution case is duly established on record qua transportation of counterfeit currency notes by the appellants Major Singh and Mastan Singh in the said car.
DW-1 Surjit Singh deposed that Santokh Singh was running a tractor repair workshop and on 26.8.2005, he had got his tractor repaired from him. At that time Balwant Singh, Des Singh, Jagdish Singh Panch were also present there. Santokh Singh was taken away by the police at 5.00 P.M. DW-2 Balwant Singh has corroborated the statement of DW-1. The statements of the said witness fail to advance the case of appellants as the said witnesses had not moved any application to higher authorities qua false involvement of the appellant Santokh Singh nor have been able to prove any record qua repair of the tractor by the appellant Santokh Singh on 26.8.2005. It appears that they have deposed in favour of appellant Santokh Singh being his co-villagers.
DW-3 Thakur Singh deposed that on 26.8.05, he was travelling in a bus to Dabwali along with Major Singh and Sohan Lal alias Soni. At 9.00 A.M., Major Singh was apprehended by the police. DW-4 Sohan Lal alias Soni has corroborated the Crl. Appeal No. 426-DB of 2008 - 17- Crl. Appeal No. 439-DB of 2008 Crl. Appeal No. 1203-DB of 2011 statement of DW-3. However, the statements of the said witnesses fail to rebut the statements of the prosecution witnesses as the said witnesses had not approached the higher authorities qua false involvement of the appellant Major Singh. It appears that they have deposed in favour of appellant Major Singh being his co-villagers.
DW-5 Darshan Singh is the brother of appellant Major Singh and has deposed that he had come to know from Thakur Singh that his brother had been taken away by the police. However, the said witness also did not move any written application to any higher police official qua false involvement of his brother. It appears that he has deposed in favour of appellant Major Singh being his brother.
Thus, the prosecution has been successful in proving its case and, hence, there is no force in the arguments raised by the learned counsels for the appellants. The learned trial court had rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants vide the impugned judgment/order dated 04.6.2008/06.6.2008.
No ground for interference is made out.
Accordingly, all the three appeals are dismissed.
(JASBIR SINGH) (SABINA)
JUDGE JUDGE
January 17, 2012
Gurpreet