Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sukhwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 1 August, 2013
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Appeal No.S-1266-SB of 2011
Date of Decision: August 01, 2013
Sukhwinder Singh
...Appellant
VERSUS
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH
Present: Mr.C.S.Jatana, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr.Yogesh Gupta, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab
for the respondent-State.
****
INDERJIT SINGH, J.
The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.04.2011, passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana, whereby, he was held guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of `1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 30.03.2009, SI Randhir Singh along with other police officials was going from village Lakha to Gurudwara Mehtiana Sahib via mettled road. Then at about 12.30 P.M., accused Sukhwinder Singh was seen coming from village Manuka side on katcha path on the bank of minor Gulati Vineet 2013.08.29 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.S-1266-SB of 2011 -2- canal, who was carrying a heavy jute bag on the carrier of the cycle and one jute bag was lying on the paddles of the cycle. On seeing the police party, he became nervous and after putting the cycle on stand, he tried to run away. Accused was apprehended. He was given offer to get the search conducted in the presence of some Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. The accused wanted to be searched before any Gazetted Officer. Then, DSP Mukhtiar Singh was informed who reached the spot. He also made offer to the accused. Then the bags were unloaded from the cycle and on checking of bags, poppy husk was recovered. Two samples of 100 gms. each were taken out from each bag and remaining poppy husk was weighed which came to be 34 kgs. 800 gms. in one bag and 20 kgs. 800 gms. in another bag. The sample parcels and the bulk parcels were sealed with the seal of Investigating Officer bearing impression "RS". DSP also put his seal on the sample parcels and bulk parcels bearing impression "MS". Sample seal slips were also prepared. Case property was taken into police possession vide recovery memo Ex.PW4/B. Ruqa Ex.PW6/A was sent to the police station on the basis of which FIR was recorded. Rough site plan was prepared. Accused was arrested. Statements of witnesses were recorded. On return to the police station, case property along with accused and witnesses were produced before Inspector Gurmit Singh, SHO, P.S. Jagraon. He verified the investigation and enquired from the witnesses and accused. Then he put his seal bearing impression "GS" on all the sample parcels, bulk parcels and sample seal impressions. Then he got the case property Gulati Vineet 2013.08.29 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.S-1266-SB of 2011 -3- deposited with MHC Sukhwinder Singh, Malkhana Incharge. On 31.03.2009, accused was produced before the Illaqa Magistrate along with the case property. for conducting proceedings under section 52- A of the NDPS Act. Then the case property was again deposited with MHC of police station Jagraon. After necessary investigation challan was presented against the accused-appellant.
On presentation of challan against accused-appellant, copies of challan and other documents were supplied to him under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Finding prima facie case, the accused-appellant was charge-sheeted under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, 1985, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In support of its case, prosecution examined PW-1 Head Constable Sukhwinder Singh, who is a formal witness and tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.PA. PW-2 Head Constable Gurcharan Singh, is also a formal witness, who tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.PB. PW-3 Inspector Gurmit Singh, who was SHO at police station Jagraon on that day mainly deposed that case property, accused and witnesses were produced before him by the Investigating Officer and he also put his seal bearing impression "GS" on all the samples and bulk parcels and he got deposited the case property with MHC Sukhwinder Singh. PW-4 DSP Mukhtiar Singh mainly deposed as per prosecution version. He also deposed regarding incriminating articles recovered from the accused-appellant. PW-5 Head Constable Bikkar Singh, who was associated with the police party headed by Investigating Officer deposed as per prosecution version. PW-6 SI Gulati Vineet 2013.08.29 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.S-1266-SB of 2011 -4- Randhir Singh, is the Investigating Officer. He mainly deposed regarding investigation conducted in the present case by him and also deposed regarding recovery of poppy husk from the accused- appellant. Learned Public Prosecutor tendered report of Chemical Examiner Ex.PX and closed the prosecution evidence.
At the close of prosecution evidence, the accused- appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and he denied the correctness of the evidence and pleaded himself as innocent. He further pleaded that he has been falsely implicated in this case. No recovery was effected from him. In fact, he was involved in this case due to enmity with Chhinder Pal Kaur, from whom he had purchased one house. He further pleaded that to grab money from him, Chhinder Pal Kaul connived with one Lohara Singh and her ex- husband Bikkar Singh, who are influential persons, got him falsely implicated in the present case. He was picked up from his house prior to the present FIR and he was involved in this case falsely.
In defence, accused-appellant examined DW-1 Head Constable Sukhwinder Singh, who brought register No.19 and proved the entry as Ex.D1. DW-2 Head Constable Jang Singh merely proved the entries Ex.D2 to Ex.D5 in the DDR register. DW-3 Head Constable Inderjit Singh also brought DDR register and he also proved entries Ex.D6 to Ex.D8.
On the basis of the evidence produced by the prosecution, accused-appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated above by the learned Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana.
Gulati Vineet2013.08.29 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.S-1266-SB of 2011 -5-
At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant contended that no independent witness was joined in the present case, which creates reasonable doubt in the prosecution version. He further argued that CFSL form was not prepared on the spot. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the MHC has nowhere stated that the sample seal slips were also deposited with him. He next argued that weight of gunny bags was not excluded while taking weight of the poppy husk. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that accused-appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case at the instance of husband of Chhinder Pal Kaur, who was police official. Learned counsel for the appellant, therefore, argued that there being merit in the appeal, it should be allowed and accused-appellant should be acquitted.
On the other hand, learned Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab argued that case of the prosecution has been duly proved by the PWs. PWs have consistently deposed regarding the prosecution version. There are no material contradictions or material improvements in their statements. Learned State counsel further argued that link evidence is complete. The recovery has been effected in the presence of Gazetted Officer. The defence version is not believable. CFSL form was prepared on the spot. Learned State counsel, therefore, argued that there being no merit, the appeal should be dismissed.
I have gone through the evidence on record minutely and carefully and have heard learned counsel for the appellant and Gulati Vineet 2013.08.29 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.S-1266-SB of 2011 -6- learned Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.
From the evidence on record, I find no merit in the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant. As per prosecution version, the recovery from the accused is sudden and by chance and there was no opportunity with the police party to join independent witness. Otherwise also, the accused-appellant was coming on the bank of the minor canal on katcha rasta and there is nothing on record to show that at that time any independent witness was available on the spot. Otherwise also, it is settled law that testimony of police official is as good as of any other witness unless some enmity or motive of the police official is alleged and proved. In the present case, police officials have no enmity or motive to falsely implicate the accused or to depose falsely against him. Otherwise also, the recovery from the accused-appellant is commercial quantity i.e. 56 kgs. of poppy husk and such a huge quantity cannot be falsely planted upon the accused-appellant.
Further, I find that defence version of the appellant is also not believable. At the time of argument, learned counsel for the appellant stated that Chhinder Pal Kaur's husband was a retired police official, whose services were terminated by the department. But there is nothing on the record to show as to how the police officials (PWs) were under the influence of husband of Chhinder Pal Kaur with whom the petitioner had some dispute. DSP Mukhtiar Singh is a Gazetted Officer. Why he will be under the influence of husband of Chhinder Pal Kaur, who was not in the police service at Gulati Vineet 2013.08.29 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.S-1266-SB of 2011 -7- the time occurrence. Otherwise also, the accused-appellant, except pleading in statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C had not produced any defence witness to prove the version regarding dispute with Chhinder Pal Kaur. Therefore, defence version is not believable. The statements of police officials are consistent on material points. There are not material contradictions or material improvements in their statements which may go to the root of the case.
As regarding, preparation of CFSL form, the Investigating Officer has stated in cross-examination that CFSL form was prepared by him at the spot. The mere fact that the date under the signatures of SHO is some other date, will not show that this document was not prepared at the spot. Definitely SHO was not present on the spot. The Investigating Officer has stated that he has obtained the signatures of DSP on this form.
Again from the record, I find that MHC has nowhere stated that sample seal slips were not deposited with him. The sample seal slips were sent to the Chemical Examiner and Chemical Examiner has compared and tallied the seals with the sample seal slips. The mere fact that weight of gunny bags was not excluded from the total recovery weight, will not create any doubt in the prosecution case. The recovery of poppy husk is 56 kgs. Even if it is presumed that the weight of each gunny bag was 1 kg. even then the recovery will remain commercial quantity. Therefore, on this ground, no benefit can be granted to the appellant. The minor discrepancies in the statements of PWs will not create any reasonable doubt. All the Gulati Vineet 2013.08.29 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Appeal No.S-1266-SB of 2011 -8- mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act have been complied with. The PWs have deposed on oath and there is nothing in their cross- examination to disbelieve their statements.
Therefore, from the above, I find that accused-appellant has been rightly convicted and sentenced. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana are upheld.
Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed.
(INDERJIT SINGH)
August 01, 2013 JUDGE
Vgulati
Gulati Vineet
2013.08.29 10:20
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh