Himachal Pradesh High Court
State Of H.P vs Ram Karan And Others on 22 December, 2015
Bench: Sanjay Karol, P.S. Rana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CRMPM No.1596 of 2015 Date of Decision : December 22, 2015 .
State of H.P. ....Petitioner.
versus
Ram Karan and others ...Respondents.
Coram:
of
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.S. Rana, Judge. For the petitioner rt : Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General.
For the Respondents : None.
Sanjay Karol, Judge.
State has filed the present petition, under the provisions of Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 30.7.2015, passed by Special Judge-I, Kullu District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, in Sessions Trial No.14/2013, titled State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ram Karan and another, whereby accused-respondents Ram Karan and Ravinder Singh (hereinafter referred to as the accused), stand acquitted of the charge for having committed offences, punishable under the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:34:35 :::HCHP ...2...
provisions of Section 20 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter after referred to as the Act).
.
2. In relation to FIR No.91/2012, dated 26.11.2012(Ex.PW-4/A), registered at Police Station, Banjar, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, under the provisions of Sections 20 & 29 of the Act, accused Ram of Karan and Ravinder Sharma were charged to face trial, for having committed offences, punishable under the rt provisions of Section 20 and 29 of the Act, respectively.
3. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that on 26.11.2012, a police party, comprising of SI Mahinder Singh (PW-8), HC Jamal Deen (PW-9), HHC Amar Chand (not examined) and HHC Bahadur Singh (PW-5), was on patrol duty towards Dhukhan and Palach side, in Government Vehicle No.HP-34A-0213.
At 2.30 p.m., when the police party was at a place known as Dhukhan, both the accused were noticed coming on a motorcycle, which was driven by accused Ravinder Sharma and accused Ram Karan was sitting as a pillion rider. The motorcycle was stopped for checking, on which accused Ram Karan threw the Pithu ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:34:35 :::HCHP ...3...
(haversack) on the left side of the road. The place being secluded one, no independent witness was available.
Investigating Officer (PW-9) associated PSI Mahinder Singh .
and HHC Amar Chand as witnesses and searched the bag, which was found containing a white coloured "Parna" and a pink coloured carry bag. From the bag, black coloured substance, was recovered, which on smelling was found to of be Charas, and on weighment found to be 370 grams. The Pithu, carrying bag and the Parna were put into a cloth parcel and sealed with eight seals of seal impression rt 'D'. NCB form (Ex.PW-1/C) was filled up in triplicate.
The parcel containing case property was taken into possession vide Memo (Ex.PW-8/B). Ruka (Ex. PW-9/A) was sent to Police Station, Banjar, through HHC Bahadur Singh, on the basis of which FIR (Ex.PW-4/A) was registered by SI Narender Kumar (PW-4). On completion of the proceedings on the spot, the case property was produced before SI Narender (PW-4), who after resealing the same with four seal of seal impression 'T', deposited it with MHC Alamgir (PW-1).
The contraband substance was sent through Constable Rohit Kumar (PW-2) to the Forensic Science Laboratory, ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:34:35 :::HCHP ...4...
Junga, for chemical analysis. Report of the Chemical Examiner (Ex. PW-7/A) was obtained. With the completion of investigation, which prima facie revealed .
complicity of the accused in the alleged crime, challan was presented in the Court for trial.
4. Based on the testimonies of witnesses and the material on record, trial Court acquitted the of accused of the charged offence. Hence, the present petition for leave to appeal by the State.
5. rtMr. J.S. Guleria, learned Assistant Advocate General, has taken me through the record of trial Court, including testimonies of the prosecution witnesses.
6. Having perused the record, we are of the considered view that the evidence led on behalf of the prosecution is totally discrepant, full of contradictions and uninspiring in confidence. The questions as to whether 370 grams Charas was recovered from accused Ram Karan and as to whether co-accused Ravinder Sharma abetted such crime, need to be examined in the light of the evidence led by the prosecution. Now, according to HHC Bahadur Singh ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:34:35 :::HCHP ...5...
(PW-5), PSI Mahinder Singh (PW-8) and HC Jamal Deen (PW-9), police had set up naka and at about 2.30 p.m., at Dhukhan Mor, vehicle driven by the accused was .
intercepted and the contraband substance recovered from conscious possession of the accused. Accused Ram Karan was carrying a bag, from which 370 grams of Charas was recovered. We find that the police, of despite availability of independent witnesses, who could have been associated, failed to do so, while rt carrying out proceedings on the spot. Further, perusal of the testimony of police officials establishes that the NCB form and the ruka bear the number of the FIR.
The documents seem to have been prepared in the same flow of hand and ink.
7. Ruka was carried to the Police Station and after registration of the FIR, file brought to the spot for completion of the proceedings, but the documents, as proved on record by the prosecution, do not establish the same.
8. The case is rendered doubtful, on account of the difference of timing recorded in the various documents. At one place, it is recorded that the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:34:35 :::HCHP ...6...
recovery was effected at 2.30 p.m., whereas in the NCB form, the time is recorded as 3.30 p.m. Also, who took the ruka to the Police Station? What was the mode of .
travel? has not been clearly proven on record. There is contradiction with regard to the description of the bag and also articles found therein.
9. Even by way of link evidence, we find the of prosecution not to have established its case, beyond reasonable doubt. There is doubt with regard to the rt safe custody of the contraband substance. Constable Rohit (PW-2) states that he took the case property from the Malkhana on 27.11.2012 and deposited it in the Laboratory on 29.11.2012. Significantly, the witness could have reached the Laboratory same day, but however, where did he keep the case property for three days, remains unexplained on record.
10. We find that the defence taken by the accused stands probablized through the testimony of HHC Raj Kumar (DW-1), who has proved and placed on record the Log Book (Ex. DW-1/A) of vehicle No.HP-34A-
0213. This belies the prosecution story that the police officials did not have any vehicle with themselves at ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:34:35 :::HCHP ...7...
the time of carrying out the search and seizure operations, for according to this witness, vehicle stood issued in the name of HC Jamal Deen, who actually .
took it to the spot.
11. Hence, trial Court, in my considered view, rightly acquitted the accused. There is no error apparent on the face of record or illegality or of perversity, resulting into miscarriage of justice, in the findings returned by the trial Court, warranting rt interference by this Court.
As such, present petition for leave to appeal, being without any merit, is dismissed and disposed of.
( Sanjay Karol), Judge.
( P.S. Rana )
December 22, 2015(sd) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:34:35 :::HCHP