Delhi District Court
Ncb vs Amit Panday & Ors. on 29 April, 2023
IN THE COURT OF ASJ/SPECIAL JUDGE/NDPS
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU
VERSUS
AMIT PANDAY & ORS.
Date of Institution : 24.02.2014
Date of Judgment reserved on : 30.11.2022
Date of Judgment : 29.04.2023
Brief details of the case
A) CNR No. : DLND01-000214-2014
B) Session Case No. : 8565/16
C) Offence complained : U/s 8 (c), 9A, 22C, 23 C
of or proved & 29 of NDPS Act, 1985.
D) Date of Offence : 20.07.2012
E) Name of the complainant: IO Pradeep Singh
F) Name of the accused : (1) Amit Panday
s/o Sh. Uday Nath Panday
r/o S-224, Pandav Nagar,
New Delhi.
(2) Deepak Kumar
s/o Sh. Sukbir Singh
r/o H. No. 1407, Pana
Parposian, Narena, Delhi.
Also at: Shop No. 27, First
Floor, Mir Singh Market,
Opp Lampur Road,
Narela, Delhi.
A) Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty
B) Final order : Acquittal
C) Date of Judgment : 29.04.2023.
SUDHIR Digitally
by SUDHIR
signed
KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI
Date: 2023.04.29
Session Case No.: 8565/16
SIROHI 15:03:45 +0530
NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 1 of 48
JUDGMENT
Brief facts mentioned in the complaint.
1. Brief facts of the case are that a secret information was received in NCB office on 13.07.2012 regarding 159 packets booked at Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, thereafter, raiding team was prepared consisting of IO MMS Bhandari, IO C S Rai, IO CSK Singh, Sh Rajender Ram, Havaldar, Sh Anil, sepoy and Sh Rajesh Kumar, driver, reached at Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, New Delhi and found 159 packets, same were found containing following tablets i.e. Tab Alprazolam, Tab Amphetamine, Tab Hydrocodone, Tab Lorazepam, Tab Acetaminophen and Codein Phasphate, Tab Zolpidem, Tab Zolpidem, Tab Alprazolam, Tab Clonzepam, Tab Diazepam and Tab Hydrocodone (Total tablets 10700). Same were seized at the spot and representative samples were taken. The said parcels were having the address of consignor as M/s Bhagwati Traders, RZ-J-16, Raj Nagar-1, Gali No. 1, Palam Colony, New Delhi and M/s Bhagwati Traders, 1390, Paposian, Delhi, thereafter it was told by Sr Post Master that these packets were booked by Sh Ashok Kumar Tripathi. Then statement of booking agent Sh Ashok Kumar Tripathi was recorded u/s 67 NDPS Act and in statement u/s 67 NDPS Act recorded on 14.07.2012, he stated that he received the said parcel from Mr Praveen Kumar, therefore notice under section 67 NDPS Act was served upon him. His statement was recorded on 19.07.2012. Mr Praveen stated that said parcel was given to him by accused Deepak SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 Date: 2023.04.29 SIROHI 15:03:53 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 2 of 48Kumar on 10.07.2012 for booking and Mr Praveen also disclosed that accused Deepak Kumar had collected the parcel from one Amit Pandey R/o S-224, Ground Floor, Pandav Nagar, Delhi, thereafter, notice u/s 67 NDPS Act was served upon accused Deepak Kumar. On basis of information with respect to medicines on 20.07.2012, a raid was conducted at S-224, Ground Floor, Pandav Nagar, New Delhi i.e. at the house of accused Amit Pandey and 05 cardboard boxes having different types 73760 medicines were recovered, same were seized, representative samples were drawn. Samples were sent to FSL, Delhi but some medicines could not be tested there, thereafter samples of those medicines were sent to CFSL, Hyderabad. After receiving CFSL report, complaint was filed.
2. On appearance of the accused persons copies of documents were supplied to them. Charge for committing offence punishable under Sections 22 r/w Section 29 and 23(c) r/w Section 28 and 29 of NDPS Act were framed against accused Amit Panday and Deepak Kumar, another charge u/s 22 (c) was also framed against accused Amit Panday by Ld. Predecessor on 25.07.2015 to which accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. To prove its case the prosecution has examined 21 witnesses. Prosecution witnesses correctly identified accused persons in the court. Prosecution evidence was closed vide order dated 17.05.2022.
Prosecution Evidence:-
Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR
KUMAR SIROHI
Date: 2023.04.29
SIROHI 15:04:05 +0530
Session Case No.: 8565/16
NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 3 of 48
4. PW1 Sh. M.M.S. Bhandari Assistant Commandant CISF MPRTC Behror deposed that on 13/7/2012 he was posted as Intelligence Officer, NCB, DZU, New Delhi. On that day at about 13:00 hours he received an information from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, New Delhi that 159 packets have been booked by Bhagwati Traders, RZJ-16, Palam Colony, New Delhi and suspected to contain psychotropic substance. He reduced the said information into writing and put up before Superintendent Sh. Y.R. Yadav who directed him to constitute a team. The said information is ExPWI/A. After that he constituted a team consisting of himself, Sh. C.S. Rai, S.K. Singh, Rajender Ram Head Constable, Anil Kumar HC, driver Rajesh Kumar. He got issued seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU 4 from the Superintendent Sh. Y.R. Yadav and entries were signed by him in the seal movement register. He also took seizing kit as well as field testing kit from the office and left the office in a govt. vehicle bearing no. DL12C 1168 along with the team at about 1:15 p.m. and reached Head Post Office, Lodhi Road New Delhi at about 1:50 p.m. On reaching the Head Office he met with Senior Post Master, Lodhi Colony Sh. Kailash Chand and gave introduction to him and also told him about the purpose. He also asked him to provide two public witnesses and produced two independent witnesses namely Sat Narain Meena and Virender Giri and both of them agreed voluntarily to join the investigation. The Head Post Master handed him a bag containing certain packets of brown colour. In the presence of public witnesses, the bag was opened and the packets in the bag were counted, same were 159 in number. The name of the consignor as well as Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:06:09 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 4 of 48consignee were mentioned on each packet. Each packet was also having stamp of "Herbal Product Samples' and was also having stamp of 'Bhagwati Traders' as consignor, the address of the consignee was written on a paper slip which was pasted on the packets. Each of the 159 packet were opened separately and the same were found containing 11 types of medicines. The names of certain medicines were alprazolam, dizapam, lorezopam, zolpeadm, hydrocodeine etc. and list of contents of 159 packets was prepared by M.M.S. Bhandari (ExPW1/B). The total number of tablets were 10700 and the same were weighed and their weight was found to be 4.790 kg including the weight of strips in which they were packed. 40 tablets were removed from the strips and were separated as per their medical name and two samples of 20 tablets each type of medicine were taken as samples and in total 22 samples were taken and were marked as A1, A2 to K1, K2. The tablets were put in a plastic pouch and then were put in a white colour envelope and were pasted with a paper slip on which the signatures of both the witnesses were obtained. He also signed the same with date. After that the same was sealed with the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU 4. The remaining tablets were put in separate 11 packets by their medical names and were marked as A to K separately and paper slips with signatures of public witnesses and his signature were affixed over the same were sealed with the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU4. The remaining packing material was kept in a gunny bag bearing name of India Post and same was sealed by affixing string and was sealed with the paper slip having signatures of public witnesses and himself and was sealed Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 15:06:15 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 5 of 48with the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU 4 and was given mark B. Test memo in triplicate were prepared and the list of articles prepared in the post office was taken into possession (ExPW1/C1 and ExPW1/C2). The whole proceedings were completed at about 7:00 p.m. then left for the NCB office along with case property. The case property was deposited with the malkhana incharge. At the spot panchnama was prepared (ExPW1/D ) and Mr. Ashok Kumar Tripathy was authorized as a booking agent and letter of his appointment was also taken into possession. A notice u/s 67 of the NDPS Act was given to Ashok Tripathi to come to NCB office on 14/7/2012 (ExPW1/E). In pursuance to the said notice Ashok Kumar Tripathi appeared before M.M.S. Bhandari in his office on 14/7/2012 and tendered his statement (Ex.PWI/F). On 14/7/2012 he submitted seizure report u/s 57 of NDPS Act regarding seizure of contraband with Superintendent Mr. Y.R. Yadav and seizure report is ExPW1/G. On 16/7/2012 the samples were sent through Superintendent to CRCL by him. In the statement made by Mr. Ashok Tripathi, Sh. Praveen Kumar was figured and notice u/s 67 of NDPS Act was issued to Mr. Praveen Kumar by Mr. M.M.S. Bhandari on 16/7/2012 and he appeared in the NCB office on 19/7/2012. The notice issued to Mr. Praveen Kumar is ExPWI/H. A team was constituted by Sh. C.S. Rai on 20/7/2012 and he was asked to join as a team member. Mr. M.M.S. Bhandari along with C.S. Rai, S.K. Sharma, Rajesh Kumar, Jai Bhagwan, driver Rajiv, driver Rajesh Kumar left the office at about 7:15 a.m. and reached at S-224, Pandav Nagar, Delhi at about 10:00 a.m. Sh. C.S. Rai asked two persons who are standing there about the Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:06:21 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 6 of 48information and were asked to join the investigation. Their names were Saxena and Juneja, both of them agreed to join the investigation voluntarily. The house no. S-224 Pandav Nagar was searched and was knocked by Sh. C.S. Rai, the door was opened by one person and on inquiry he revealed his name as Amit Panday. Sh. C.S. Rai showed and told about the house search authorization to Amit Panday and Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sh. M. M. S. Bhandari gave a notice u/s 50 of NDPS Act to Amit Panday and it was told to him that his search can be conducted before the Gazetted officer or Magistrate if accused so wishes but accused refused the same and gave in writing that accused did not require magistrate or any Gazetted officer. Thereafter the search of the house was conducted and 5 cardboard boxes of different sizes, one black colour bag and four khaki colour envelopes which were ready for dispatch and laptop, envelopes, seal, weighing machine, cheque book, house agreement and certain medicines were recovered. Cardboard boxes opened and were found containing different type of medicines. Thereafter tablets from each of medicine were taken out of strips and two samples tablets each were prepared by putting 20 tablets each plastic envelope and the same was again put in a paper envelope and white paper slips were affixed on each of envelope paper were signed with date by IO Mr. C.S. Rai, independent witnesses and sealed with seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU3 and were marked A1, A2 to LI, L2. The remaining material were in 12 plastic envelopes out of which mark A to L. A to E were in polybags. F to L were put in plastic bag and converted cloth pullanda and were sealed with seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:06:27 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 7 of 48BUREAU DZU3. A to E were sealed in polybag itself with seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU 3. The polybags as well all the pullandas were also signed by Mr. C.S. Rai and both public witnesses. The remaining material were taken into possession. Test memo in triplicate were prepared, Panchnama was prepared at the spot. List of the medicines recovered were prepared. The total number of tablets were 73760 but witness did not remember the weight. Notice 67 NDPS was served upon accused Amit Panday by Sh. Rajesh. Similarly Sh. S. K. Sharma served notice u/s 67 of NDPS Act upon Deepak Kumar. Notice u/s 67 of NDPS Act were given to both the witnesses by Sh C.S. Rai, IO. All the property recovered alongwith both the accused persons returned back to NCB office. PW1 recorded the statement of Mr. Saxena u/s 67 of NDPS Act (ExPW1/1). On 27/8/2012 the CRCL reports were received by witness through Superintendent regarding two recoveries. On 3/9/2012 samples were sent to CFSL, Hyderabad through Superintendent and Zonal Director Sh. Manoranjan Kumar. The forwarding notes are ExPW1/J, EXPW1/K and ExPW1/L. On 15/10/2012 again two samples were sent to CFSL, Hyderabad with forwarding note (Ex.PWI/M). The entries made in the seal movement register is Ex.PWI/N. During evidence, cloth pullanda mark A having particulars of the case VIII/16/DZU/2012 was produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip is affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was sealed with NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was cut open and paper slip alongwith string was removed Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR Session Case No.: 8565/16 KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors. SIROHI 15:06:34 +0530 Page No. 8 of 48 (Ex. PA1). The witness on being asked had stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. Pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of alprazolem tablets 2mg ALMEE 2. The witness identifies the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents is Ex.P1. During evidence, cloth pullanda mark B having particulars of the case VIII/16/DZU/2012 was produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip was affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda could not be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was found containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was cut open and paper slip alongwith string was removed and same was Ex.PB1. The witness on being asked had stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. Pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing strips of Amphetamine 30 mg tablets Adderall. PW1 identified the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda Ex.P2. During evidence, cloth pullanda mark C having particular of the case VIII/16/DZU/2012 was produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip was affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda could not be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was found containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was cut open and Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:06:40 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 9 of 48paper slip alongwith string was removed (Ex.PC1). Pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of Hydrocodone 10 mg/500 mg tablets. PW1 identified the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents was Ex.P3. During evidence, cloth pullanda mark D having particulars of the case VIII/16/DZU/2012 is produced. Its mouth is found tied with a string and a paper slip is affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was found containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was now cut open and paper slip alongwith string was removed (Ex.PD1). The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. The pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of Lorazepam 2 mg tablets Atipam-2. The witness identifies the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents is Ex.P4. During evidence, a cloth pullanda mark E bearing the particular of the case namely VIII/16/DZU/2012 is produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip was affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was found containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was cut open and paper slip alongwith string was removed and same is Ex.PEI. The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:06:47 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 10 of 48contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. The pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of Acetaminophen and Codeine Phosphate tablets 650/30 mg. The witness identifies the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents is Ex.PS. during evidence, a cloth pullanda mark F bearing the particular of the case namely VIII/16/DZU/2012 is produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip is affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda found containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was cut open and paper slip along with string is removed and same is Ex.PFI. The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. The pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of Zolpidem 10 mg tablets. The witness identifies the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents is Ex.P6. during evidence, a cloth pullanda mark G bearing the particular of the case namely VIII/16/DZU/2012 was produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip was affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was found containing the seal NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was cut open slip alongwith string was removed and SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29 KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:06:53 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 11 of 48same is Ex.PG1. The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. The pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of Zolpidem Tartrate tablet 10mg Zolt. The witness identifies the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents is Ex.P7. During evidence, a cloth pullanda mark H bearing the particular of the case namely VIII/16/DZU/2012 is produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip was affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was found containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was cut open and paper slip alongwith string was removed (Ex.PHI). The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. The pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of Alprazolem 1mg Tranax-1. The witness identified the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents is Ex.P8. During evidence, a cloth pullanda mark I bearing the particular of the case namely VIII/16/DZU/2012 is produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip was affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was found containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29 KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:06:59 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 12 of 48DZU-4. The string was now cut open and paper slip alongwith string was removed and same was Ex.PII. The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. The pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of Clonazepam 2mg Onapil-2. The witness identifies the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents is Ex.P9. during evidence,, a cloth pullanda mark J bearing the particular of the case namely VIII/16/DZU/2012 was produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip was affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was found containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was cut open and paper slip alongwith string was removed (Ex.PJI). The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. The pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of Diazepam Zepose-10 mg tablets. The witness identifies the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents is Ex.P10. During evidence, a cloth pullanda mark K bearing the particular of the case namely VIII/16/DZU/2012 was produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip was affixed on the said string in such a manner that the pullanda cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The pullanda was found SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:07:06 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 13 of 48containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string cut opened and paper slip alongwith string was removed (Ex.PK1). The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. The pullanda on opening was found containing one transparent polythene packet containing many strips of Hydrocodone 75mg Vicodin tablets. The witness identifies the said tablets having been recovered from Head Post Office, Lodhi Road, Delhi. The cloth pullanda alongwith its contents is Ex.P11. during evidence,, nine white envelopes mark A-2, B-2, D-2, E-2, F-20 H-2, 1-2 and J-2 having case file no. VIII/16/DZU/2012 sealed with the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU 4 in intact condition are produced by the Naib Court. The envelopes cannot be opened without disturbing the seals. The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the public witnesses at points B and C. It is stated by the witness that these samples contain tablets corresponding to mark A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I and J. Two brown envelopes mark C-1 and K-2 sealed with seal of FSL, Rohini were produced and according to the witness, these envelopes were containing the remnant samples which were were received back from FSL, Rohini. During evidence, five envelopes mark A- 1, B-1, E-1, H-1 and J-1 having case file no. VIII/16/DZU/2012 sealed with the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU 4 and CRCL in intact condition were produced and according to the witness, these envelopes were containing the remnant samples which were were received back from CRCL, Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:07:12 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 14 of 48Pusa, New Delhi. Two envelopes mark C-1 and K-1 having case file no. VIII/16/DZU/2012 sealed with the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU 4 and CRC, in intact condition were produced and according to the witness, these envelopes were containing the remnant samples which were received back from CRCL, Pusa, New Delhi with recommendation that the same may be sent to CFSL, Hyderabad. The said samples are now Ex.P21 and P22. During evidence, four envelopes mark D-1, F-1, G-1 and 1-1 having case file no. CFSL(H)/311/Chem/10/2013 sealed with the seal of CFSL, Hyderabad in intact condition by NCB and according to the witness, these envelopes were containing the remnant samples which were were received back from CFSL, Hyderabad. During evidence, a plastic gunny bag mark P bearing the particular of the case namely VIII/16/DZU/2012 was produced. Its mouth was found tied with a string and a paper slip is affixed on the said string in such a manner that the gunny bag cannot be opened without disturbing the paper slip. The gunny bag was found containing the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU-4. The string was now cut open and paper slip alongwith string was removed and same is Ex.PP1. The witness on being asked has stated that the paper slip contains his signature at point A and the signatures of both the witnesses at points B and C. The gunny bag on opening found containing a number of brown envelopes of different sizes 159 in number and bearing the name of consignor as Bhagwati Traders. Some are bearing the address of Bhagwati Traders as 1390, Paposian, Delhi 110040 and some are bearing the address of Bhagwati Traders, RZ J-16, Raj Nagar-1, Gali no.1, Palam Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:07:18 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 15 of 48Colony, New Delhi-110077. On all the envelopes a paper slip is pasted of custom declaration marking the product as 'herbal products' (sample). The gunny bag alongwith its contents is Ex.P23.
5. PW2 Sh. C.S. Rai, Ex-IO, NCB DZU deposed in line of PW1 about recovery of 13.07.2012 and 20.07.2012. PW2 further deposed that on 20.07.2012 he took case property in his possession and returned back to the NCB office, they reached NCB office at about 03.15 PM. Sh. C.S. Rai returned back the seal to superintendent Y. R. Yadav and the case property alongwith test memo in triplicate was deposited with malkhana incharge. On 21.07.212, seizure report (Ex. PW2/K) was submitted to superintendent Mr. Y. R. Yadav photocopy of the entry on the seal movement register is Ex.PW2/L (OSR). All papers were submitted to Sh. MMS Bhandari for further investigation.
6. PW4 Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Assistant Commandant, CISF deposed on 20.07.2012, IO Sh. C.S. Rai told him that Sh. C.S. Rai had search authorization to search the house no. 224, Pandav Nagar, New Delhi belongs to accused Amit Panday and requested him to join raiding team then PW4 deposed in line of PW1 & PW2 about recovery on 20.07.2012.
7. PW5: Sh. S.K. Sharma, Sub Area Organizer, SSB, Narkatiyaganj, Distt. West Champaran, Bihar deposed that on 13.07.2012, he was working as IO Malkhana in NCB DZU. On the same day, IO M.M.S. Bhandari deposited the case property in the present case at around 07.50 PM alongwith test memo in SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29 KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:07:25 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 16 of 48triplicate. Case property was sealed with the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU 4. Entries were made in the malkhana register. Photocopy of the same is Ex.PW5/A mark A1 to A2. On 16.07.2012 the samples of this case property were sent to CRCL on the directions of Sh. Y. R. Yadav, Superintendent and entries were made in the malkhana register from point B1 to B2 of Ex.PW5/A. On 20.07.2012 Sh. S.K. Sharma was told by Sh. C.S. Rai, IO NCB that he has to accompany him to Pandav Nagar as a member of raiding team. On reaching Pandav Nagar Sh. C.S. Rai gave him directions to serve notice u/s 67 NDPS Act to accused Deepak at his address Pana Paposian at Narela. Immediately he alongwith Sudhir Nayak, Farash and driver Rajiv Kumar left for the said place in government vehicle. On reaching the said place i.e. H. No. 1407, Pana Paposian, he met with accused Deepak Kumar and served him notice u/s 67 NDPS Act and asked him to appear in the NCB office at 02.00 PM on the same day and thereafter Sh. S.K. Sharma came back to NCB office. On the same day at about 03.30 PM Sh. C.S. Rai deposited property in respect of the present case with him in the malkhana which were sealed with the seal of NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU DZU 3. He made entries in the malkhana register and entries are from C1 to C2 on Ex.PW5/A. On 20.07.2012, accused Deepak appeared before him and showed his summons and gave his statement and the same is Ex.PW5/B which bears his signature at point A and of accused Deepak at point B. On 21.07.2012, he prepared arrest memo of the accused at about 07.00 AM and also took personal search of the accused and the arrest memo (Ex.PW5/C) and SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29 KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:07:31 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 17 of 48jamatalashi (Ex.PW5/D). He submitted an arrest report regarding the arrest of accused Deepak Kumar before the Superintendent (Ex.PW5/E). The accused informed him that he wanted to inform his sister about his arrest and made endorsement on the back side of the arrest memo in this respect and the same (Ex.PW5/F). On 30.07.2012 witness received a hard disc and laptop from NCB, Hyderabad in sealed condition sealed with the seal of NCB SEAL NO.01, RIC HYD. Entries were made in the malkhana register and the photocopy of the same are at point D1 to D2 on Ex.PW5/A. On 27.08.2012 remnant samples were received from CRCL and entries were made in malkhana register at point E1 to E2 and F1 to F2. On 23.07.2012 he had sent the samples to CRCL Pusa Road and entries were made and the photocopy of the same is at point G1 to G2 on Ex.PW5/A. On 03.09.2012 samples in respect of both the recoveries were sent to CFSL Hyderabad through Sh. Anil Kumar Sepoy and entries were made in the malkhana register and photocopy of the same are at point H1 to H2 and J1 to J2 on Ex.PW5/A. On 14.09.2012 samples were received back from CFSL Hyderabad and entries were made in malkhana register and photocopy of the same are at point K1 to K2 and L1 to L2 on Ex.PW5/A. On the same day samples C2 and K2 were sent to CFSL Hyderabad through Hawaldar Rajender Ram and entries were made in malkhana register. Same is at point M1 to M2 on Ex.PW5/A. On 21.09.2012 samples C2 and K2 were received from CFSL Hyderabad and entries were made in malkhana register at point N1 to N2 on Ex.PW5/A. On 16.10.2012 samples C2 and K2 were sent to FSL, Rohini as per the directions of the court and Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:07:38 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 18 of 48entries were made in malkhana register at point O1 to O2 on Ex.PW5/A. On 12.12.2012 he received back samples C2 and K2 from FSL, Rohini and entries were made in malkhana register at point P1 to P2 on Ex. PW5/A. On 05.02.2013 he sent samples mark D1, F1, G1, I1 and samples D1, E1, G1, J1, K1 to CFSL, Hyderabad and entries were made in malkhana register at point Q1 to Q2 and R1 to R2 on Ex.PW5/A. On 03.09.2012 he sent hard disc received from NCB Hyderabad to CFSL, Hyderabad and entries were made in malkhana register at point S1 to S2 on Ex.PW5/A. On 26.03.2013 examination report of hard disc was received from CFSL, Hyderabad and entries were made in malkhana register at point T1 to T2 on Ex.PW5/A.
8. PW6 Sh. Yad Ram Yadav, Assistant Commandant, CISF, MPRTC, Behror, Rajasthan deposed that on 13.07.2012, he was posted as a superintendent, DZU, NCB, New Delhi. On that day, at about 13.00 hours, Investigation Officer Sh. M.M.S. Bhandari submitted a secret information before him regarding some parcels lying in Lodhi Road post office suspected to be contained psychotropic substances. On this information, he directed M. M. S. Bhandari to constitute a team and take action as per law. The said information is Ex. PW1/A and the endorsement made by him is from point B to B. At about 13.15 hours, he issued a seal of Narcotics Control Bureau, DZU-4 to M. M. S. Bhandari to carry out the search and seizures of the same. The said seal was deposited before him at about 20.00 hours on the same day after completion of seizure proceedings. Entry to that effect was made in seal movement register (Ex. PW 1/M). IO Sh. M.M.S. Bhandari submitted seizure report U/S 57 Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR Session Case No.: 8565/16 KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors. SIROHI 15:07:45 +0530 Page No. 19 of 48 of NDPS Act on 14.07.2012 (Ex. PW 1/G). On 16.07.2012, PW6 forwarded the samples and test memo of that case to CRCL through Ct. Ved Prakash. After depositing the samples, the receipt of CRCL was marked to IO for further investigation. The photocopy of the forwarding letter is Mark X. The test memo is Ex. PW 6/A, the receipt is Ex.PW 6/B. On 20.07.2012, IO Sh. Jai Bhagwan put up an information before him stating that the parcels sealed on 13.07.2012 were sent for booking by one Amit Panday, if the search of his premises would carried out, it might be recovery of more psychotropic substances. On this information, PW6 directed IO Sh. C.S. Rai to constitute a team and take necessary action as per law. On being asked to PW6 that whether he could identify the same information which was put up befor him then PW6 replied in affirmative. During evidence, information (Ex. PW 2/C) was shown to the witness and the witness identified the same which was put up before him. PW6 issued search authorization in favour of IO Sh. C.S. Rai for carrying out the search of premises of accused Amit Panday. The information is Ex. PW 2/D. PW6 issued a seal of Narcotics Control Bureau, DZU-3 at about 07.00 hours. After carry out the seizure proceedings, C.S. Rai deposited the same before PW6 on the same day at about 15.20 hours. Entry to this effect was made in the seal movement register (Ex. PW 2/C). On 21.07.2012, IO Sh. C.S. Rai submitted seizure report u/s 57 of NDPS Act before PW6 (Ex. PW 2/A). IO/Sh. S.K. Sharma and Jai Bhagwan put up the arrest report in respect of accused Deepak and Amit Panday. On 23.07.2012, PW6 forwarded the samples to CRCL through sepoy Narender Kumar. After depositing the samples, the receipt SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 Date: 2023.04.29 SIROHI 15:07:50 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 20 of 48of CRCL was given to PW6 and the same was marked to IO for further investigation. During investigation, PW6 received test reports from CRCL and marked the same to IO, Malkhana and concerned IO of the case, said reports are Ex. PW 6/D & Ex. PW 6/E.
9. PW14 Sh Kamal Saxena (it is noticed during judgment that earlier this witness has been examined as PW8) deposed that on 20.07.2012 at about 10.00-10.15am, he was standing outside his house, some persons came and told him that they have information that Amit Panday is dealing in prohibited drugs and asked the address of Amit Panday and he told them that Amit Panday resides in his house as a tenant. NCB officers shown him a paper and told him that they had to search the premises of Amit Panday and asked him to help them to stand as a witness. Then they asked him that they required two witnesses and requested him to bring one more person. witness called his friend namely Harish Chand Juneja to come and stand as a witness. The NCB officers then also introduced themselves to Harish Chand Juneja. After that they went to the residence of Amit Panday which was on ground floor. Search authorization was shown to Amit Panday. Then they gave a letter to Amit Panday and asked him that if he wanted his search before a Magistrate or a Gazetted officer to which Amit Panday declined and said any officer present could take his search. The Authorization letter is Ex PW2/D. The letter given to Amit Panday is Ex PW4/A. The writing B1 to B2 on Ex PW4/A was in the handwriting of Amit Panday where he stated that any NCB officer could take his search. After that search was conducted and NCB officers recovered five cartons and one of Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR Session Case No.: 8565/16 KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors. SIROHI 15:07:56 +0530 Page No. 21 of 48 them was of black colour and remaining four were of Khaki colour and they were also four khaki envelope. The khaki envelopes were having address of some place at USA. The black colour carton was opened and the said parcel was containing packed medicines. After that, one by one the remaining four khaki cartons were also opened and they were also containing medicines, some of them were in intact conditions and some of them were in open strip form. The envelopes were also opened one by one and they were also containing medicines and the name of one of them was Diazapam. After that medicines from the five cartons were segregated and total count was about 73,000 in number. After that the medicines were weighed and its weight came out to be 22 kg. Thereafter, the tablets in loose strips form were put in a transparent polythene bag and then they were put in another white colour cloth bag. The medicines recovered from the remaining five bags were put in different white colour cloth. Witness again said, might be white plastic bag. Witness Again said, as far as he remember, it was white colour plastic bag. After that, the laptop, cheque book, various rubber stamps and some empty khaki envelopes were also put in a white colour plastic bag. Thereafter, some paper was pasted on it and some seal were also affixed over them. That slips got signed by him, by Amit Panday, by Harish Chand Juneja and by NCB official i.e. Mr. Rai. After that a paper was prepared and was shown to them and the same were also signed by him, by Amit Panday, by Harish Chand Juneja and by NCB official i.e. Mr Rai. The said document is Ex PW2/E. Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 SIROHI 15:08:02 +0530 Session Case No.: 8565/16 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 22 of 4810. PW9 B.S. Bisht, Assistant Chemical Examiner, CRCL deposed that on 16.07.2012, he received 11 packets of samples alongwith test memo in duplicate which were assigned to him by the Chemical Examiner (Incharge of Section) for analysis. He took samples alongwith test memo. Each of the 11 samples packets (marked as Al to K1) were bearing 04 numbers of laac seals. The seals were bearing the impression as Narcotics Control Bureau, DZU4. The impression of the seal was matched/tallied with the facsimile of seal as given on the test memo. The description given on the sample packets also tallied with the description given on the test memo. The receipt issued by him is Ex.PW6/D and the samples were kept in strong room alongwith test memo in the presence of Chemical Examiner under lock and key. Copy of the test memo is Ex. PW6/A and the forwarding letter is Ex. PW9/A. On 26.7.2012, 11 numbers of samples packets alongwith test memo were taken out from the strong room in the presence of Chemical Examiner. Out of 11 samples, only 7 samples were opened and remaining 4 samples with the registration No.CLD391(N), CLD393(N), CLD394(N) and CLD396(N) marked as DI, FI, GI and II with the description Lorazepam, Zolpidem, Taratarte, Zolpidem and Chlorazepam respectively, could not be analyzed as the reference standard (active ingredients) of these medicines were not available in the laboratory hence the untested samples in original sealed condition were returned to NCB and with request that the same might be forwarded to CFSL Hyderabad/Central Drug Laboratory, Kolkata for testing. Each of the 07 samples marked as A1, B1, C1, EI, HI, JI & KI were bearing four number of lac Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 15:08:09 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 23 of 48seals at the time of taking out from the strong room and were in intact condition. The impression of the seal was tallied with the facsimile of seal as given on the test memo. Thereafter, the sample taken for analysis in the presence of Chemical Examiner and analysis were started. After opening the samples, the samples were in the form of tablet packed in a strip and kept in auto press plastic pouch. Gross weights of each of the 7 samples alongwith auto press plastic pouch were recorded. The sample marked CLD388(N) marked as Al answered positive test for Alprazolam. Sample marked as CLD389(N) marked as B1 - answered positive test for Amphetamine. Sample marked as CLD390(N) marked as Cl having description of hydocodone bitartarate and acetaminophen. It answered positive test for paracetamol (acetaminophen). The reference standard of other ingredients (hydocodone bitartarate) of this medicine was not available in this laboratory hence, the sample under reference was sent back to NCB for forwarding to CFSL Hyderabad. Sample marked as CLD392(N) marked as El - answered positive test for paracetamol (acetaminophen) and codeine phosphate. Sample marked as CLD395(N) marked as HI answered positive test for alprazolam. Sample marked as CLD397(N) marked as J1 - answered positive test for diazepam. Sample marked as CLD398(N) marked as Kl NGB Vs. Amit Panday & Anr. answered positive test for paracetamol (acetaminophen). The reference standard of other ingredients hydocodone bitartarate of this medicine was not available in this laboratory and hence the sample was sent back to NCB with request to forward the same to CFSL Hyderabad or CDTL Kolkata. The purity percentage of SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29 KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:08:15 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 24 of 48samples under reference could not be detected for want of facilities and hence the samples were sent back to NCB for sending to CFSL Hyderabad or CDTL Kolkata for analysis. After analysis, the gross weight alongwith auto press plastic pouch of the remnant sample marked as A1, B1, C1, EL, HI, J1 and K1 were recorded. Analytical observations were submitted to Chemical Examiner and after that issued the report (Ex.PW6/D). The remnant samples sealed with the impression having "Central Control Revenue Laboratory Government of India 2" and returned to NCB. On 23.07.2012, PW9 posted as Assistant Chemical Examiner in Narcotics Section of CRCL. PW9 received 12 packets of samples alongwith test memo in duplicate which were assigned to him by the Chemical Examiner (Incharge of Section) for analysis. PW9 took the samples alongwith test memo. Each of the 12 samples packets marked as Al to LI were bearing 04 numbers of lac seals. The seals were bearing the impression as Narcotics Control Bureau, DZU3. The impression of the seal was tallied with the facsimile of seal as given on the test memo. The description given on the sample packets also tallied with the description given on the test memo. The receipt is Ex.PW6/C. The samples were kept in strong room alongwith test memo in the presence of Chemical Examiner under lock and key (Ex. PW2/F) and the forwarding letter (Ex. PW9/B). On 07.08.2012, the 12 number of samples packet alongwith test memo were taken out from the strong room in the presence of Chemical Examiner. Out of 12 samples, only 7 samples were opened and remaining 5 samples with the registration No.CLD421(N), CLD422(N), CLD424(N) and CLD427(N) & Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:08:21 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 25 of 48CLD428(N) marked as D1, E1, G1, J1 and K1 respectively with the description Lorazepam, Zolpidem, Lorazepam, Lorazepam & Zolpidem respectively could not be analyzed as the reference standard (active ingredients) of these medicines were not available in this laboratory hence the untested samples in original sealed condition were returned to NCB and with request that the same may be forwarded to CFSL Hyderabad/Central Drug Laboratory, Kolkata for testing. Each of the 07 samples marked as AI, BI, CI, FI, HI, II & LI were bearing four number of laac seals at the time of taking out from the strong room and were in intact condition. The impression of the seal was tallied with the facsimile of seal as given on the test memo. Thereafter, the sample taken for analysis in the presence of Chemical Examiner and analysis was started. After opening of samples, samples were in the form of tablet packed in a strip and kept in auto press plastic pouch. Gross weights of each of the 7 samples alongwith auto press plastic pouch were recorded. The sample CLD418(N), CLD419(N), CLD423(N). CLD425(N), CLD426(N) and CLD429(N) marked as A1, B1, FI, HI, II & L1 respectively - answered positive test for Alprazolam. Sample CLD420(N) marked as C1 - answered positive test for Diazepam. The purity percentage of the samples under reference could not be detected and hence the samples were sent back to NCB for sending to CFSL Hyderabad or CDTL Kolkata for analysis. After analysis, the gross weight of the remnant sample alongwith auto press plastic pouch of the sample marked as A1, B1, C1, F1, HI, II and L1 were recorded. Analytical observations were submitted to Chemical Examiner and then he issued the report and the report Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:08:27 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 26 of 48is Ex.PW6/E. The remnant samples sealed with the impression having "Central Control Revenue Laboratory Government of India 2" returned to NCB.
11. PW10 Sh. Ved Prakash deposed that on 16.07.2012 he handed over a forwarding letter (Ex.PW9/A) with his signatures alongwith sample. Thereafter, he left for the CRCL, Pusa Road, Delhi and met with Sh. B.S. Bisht, ACE and Sh. B. S. Bisht after checking the seals on the samples issued him a receipt dated 16.07.2012 (Ex.PW6/B). He after reaching the NCB office handed over the receipt to the Superintendent, NCB.
12. PW11 Sh. Harish Chander Juneja (independent witness) deposed that on 20.07.2012 he went to his friend's house Sh. Kamal Saxena and at about 10.00 AM some officers from NCB came and informed them that they have to go to the house of Sh. Amit Panday who was residing at S- 224, Pandav Nagar, they also talked to Mr. Kamal Saxena and both of them agreed. The house of Amit Panday was knocked and Amit Panday opened the door. NCB officers introduced themselves to Amit Panday. NCB officer also showed the authorization letter regarding the search of the said house. The said authorization letter was also signed by Kamal Saxena and Amit Panday. Thereafter the search of the house was conducted by the NCB officers. Some cardboard boxes were recovered which were 4 or 5 in number and there were some envelopes also. Some rubber stamps and packing material was also recovered. After opening the cardboard boxes, some medicines were also recovered, name of medicines were alprazem, diazapem. The medicines were counted and were also Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 SIROHI 15:08:33 +0530 Session Case No.: 8565/16 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 27 of 48weighed with the machine which they were having. The weight was approximately 22/23 Kg. The number of tablets were around 73000. They made some markings and two samples of 20 tablets each were taken and they were 12 in number and they were marked A1, A2, L1, L2 and then B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I upto O. The samples were packed in polythene packets and then were packed in envelopes. The remaining property was also packed in cardboard boxes. After packing they were also sealed with some seal and their signature were also obtained on the paper slips which were affixed over the same. The signature of Amit Panday were also obtained on those slips and NCB officers also signed the same. The NCB officers also read some document to Amit Panday in their presence.
13. PW13 Sh. S.K. Singh, Retired Chemical Examiner, deposed that in the month of July 2012, he was working as a Chemical Examiner, Grade-II, CRCL, New Delhi. On 12.07.2012, 11 samples Mark A1 to K1 were sent alongwith test memo and 7 samples Mark A1, B1, C1, E1, H1, J1 and K1 were analyzed under his supervision by Sh. B.S. Bisht, Assistant Chemical Examiner and remaining 4 samples Mark D1, F1, G1 and I1 were sent back to NCB as there was no reference sample available in CRCL with recommendation to send them to Central Laboratory, Hyderabad/Kolkata after sealing the same with the seal of CENTRAL REVENUE CONTROL LABORATORY, GOVT. OF INDIA-2. In respect of remaining 7 samples Mark A1, B1, C1, E1, H1, J1, K1 after analysis, he submitted his report on 01.08.2012, the said report is already Ex. PW 6/D which bears his signatures at point A. On 23.07.2012, 12 samples Mark A1 to Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:08:39 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 28 of 48L1 were sent alongwith test memo and 7 samples Mark A1, B1, C1, F1, H1, I1 and L1 were analyzed under his supervision by Sh. B.S. Bisht, Assistant Chemical Examiner and remaining 5 samples Mark D1, E1, G1, J1 and K1 were sent back to NCB as there was no reference sample available in CRCL with recommendation to send them to Central Laboratory, Hyderabad/Kolkata after sealing the same with the seal of CENTRAL REVENUE CONTROL LABORATORY, GOVT. OF INDIA-2. In respect of remaining 7 samples Mark A1, B1, C1, F1, H1, I1, L1 after analysis, he submitted his report on 09.08.2012, the said report is already Ex. PW 6/E which bears his signatures at point A. The remnant samples were also sent back to NCB with the seal of CENTRAL REVENUE CONTROL LABORATORY, GOVT. OF INDIA-2. during evidence, 7 samples Mark A1, B1, C1, E1, H1, J1 and K1 are produced and witness states that they are the same samples which were after examination sent back to NCB. During evidence, remnant samples Mark A1, B1, C1, F1, H1, I1 and L1 were produced and witness states that they are the same samples which were after examination sent back to NCB.
14. PW17 Sh Kuldeep Singh Chauhan, Intelligence Bureau deposed that he joined NCB on deputation in December, 2012. He did not know much about the case since the case was registered prior to his joining however there were certain issues regarding testing of samples which were forwarded to FSL, New Delhi. They have asked to get the samples tested from CFSL, Hyderabad as they did not have any standard or reference Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 SIROHI 15:08:45 +0530 Session Case No.: 8565/16 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 29 of 48samples. Accordingly, the samples were forwarded to CFSL under his signatures.
15. PW18 Ms. Seema Srivastava, AD, CFSL deposed that she received this case from NCB Delhi, on 07.02.2013 through messenger Sh. Rajendra Ram Hawaldar PIS No. NCB/1273. In the form of 4 sealed white paper envelopes, these exhibits send by the forwarded by the NCB DZU New Delhi. The seals on the envelopes were intact and tallied with the specimen impression. The exhibit were analyzed appropriately by color test, formaldehyde-sulphuric acid, marquis test, and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). As per the analysis, Lorazepam has been detected in Exhibits D-1 to D-20, Zolpidem has been detected in Exhibits F-1 to F-20 and G- 1 to G-20 and Clonazepam has been detected in Exhibits 1-1 to 1-20. After the examination the parcels containing the exhibits/remnants have been sealed with the seal impression as per the specimen provided in the report. The forwarding letter Dt. 04.02.2013 is already exhibit PW7/E, and the report alongwith forwarding letter is exhibit PW18/A&B (Objected to).
16. PW20 Sh. Jai Bhagwan deposed that on 19.07.2012 he was posted as Intelligence Officer in NCB DZU, New Delhi. On that day, IO M.M.S. Bhandari told him to record the statement of Praveen Kumar. Sh. Praveen Kumar appeared before Sh. Jai Bhagwan, he was having a notice u/s 67 NDPS Act. Sh. Jai Bhagwan told him about his right that if he so require he can remain silent and can also make his statement. Praveen Kumar told that he wants to make his statement. Accordingly, he made Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 SIROHI 15:08:52 +0530 Session Case No.: 8565/16 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 30 of 48his statement in his own handwriting and the same is Ex.PW20/A which bears signature of Sh. Jai Bhagwan at point A and that of Praveen Kumar at point B. In his statement Praveen Kumar deposed about his family. He further disclosed that on 10.07.2012 Deepak Kumar phoned him and called him near Lodhi Road post office. He reached there and met with Deepak Kumar and he handed over 159 parcels and also money for booking the said parcels. He further told him to book these parcels through Ashok Kumar Tripathi, an agent of post office. He further disclosed in his statement that Deepak Kumar is his brother in law (sala). He further disclosed that the said parcels were handed over to Deepak by Amit Kumar Panday who is residing at S-224, ground floor, Pandav Nagar, New Delhi. On further inquiry from Praveen, he disclosed that sometime Deepak Kumar used to book the parcels directly and sometime, through him. On further inquiry he revealed that he was not aware of the contents of the parcel as the parcels were given in packed condition. He further disclosed that he used to get 5% commission for booking of those parcels. Witness gave information to the Superintendent on 20.07.2012 at about 06.30 AM about the statement made by Praveen Kumar and wrote the same and put up before superintendent Sh. Y.R. Yadav. The said information is already Ex.PW2/C. After sometime, Sh. C.S. Rai informed him that he has been given search authorization to search the house no. 224, ground floor, Pandav Nagar, New Delhi and asked witness to accompany him as a team member. PW20 alongwith IO M.M.S. Bhandari, IO C.S. Rai, IO Rajesh Kumar, IO S.K. Sharma, Farash Sudhir Nayak, Sepoy Narender Kumar left the NCB Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR SIROHI KUMAR Date:
Session Case No.: 8565/16 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
SIROHI 2023.04.29 15:09:02 +0530 Page No. 31 of 48 office in a government vehicle at about 07.20 AM and reached at Pandav Nagar at about 10.00 am, thereafter, PW20 deposed in line of PW1, PW2 and PW5 w.r.t. recovery of 20.07.2012.
17. PW21 Sh. Manoranjan Kumar, Ex. Zonal Director NCB deposed that on 03.09.2012 he handed over the samples to Sepoy Anil Kumar to submit the same at CFSL, Hyderabad and he signed the covering letter (Ex.PW21/A) and other related documents. Authority letter is Ex.PW21/B . The appendix 1 and 2 are already Ex.PW1/J. Besides the abovesaid forwarding letter, he also issued another forwarding letter and related documents for the purpose of sending the samples to CFSL, Hyderabad and Anil Kumar, Sepoy was authorized to deposit the sample to CFSL, Hyderabad and after receiving sample from CFSL in the letter dated 11.09.2012 the same was marked to IO through Superintendent.
18. PW22 Sh. Anil Kumar, Sepoy, NCB deposed that on 03.09.2012 vide forwarding letter already Ex.PW21/A. He deposited the sample with CFSL Hyderabad and collected the samples from Sh. Manoranjan Kumar. He signed the malkhana register after receiving the samples. Another forwarding letter Ex.PW21/C and authority letter Ex.PW21/D. He was authorized to deposit the set of samples. The samples were handed over to him by Sh. Manoranjan Kumar and put his signature in the godown register. The other relevant documents were also given to him alongwith abovesaid forwarding and authority letters. He visited CFSL, Hyderabad and deposited the samples. Receipts were obtained from the CFSL. and were submitted in NCB Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 SIROHI 15:09:10 +0530 Session Case No.: 8565/16 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.Page No. 32 of 48
office. During evidence malkhana register Ex.PW5/A was shown to the witness and witness could not find out his signatures.
19. PW23 IO Pradeep Singh, NCB, deposed that he had filed the complaint in present case along with documents and same is ExPW23/A bearing his signature at point A. He has also filed an application regarding verification of addresses of public witnesses and same is Ex PW23/B bearing his signature at point A. He had not investigated the matter and he had just filed the complaint after transfer of Sh C S Rai and file was transferred to him.
Statement of accused:-
20. Statement of the accused persons were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. and all the incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence were put to the accused persons, to which accused persons denied all the incriminating circumstances and did not lead any evidence in their defence. During 313 CrPC statement accused Amit Panday submitted that no contraband was recovered from his possession and he was forced to sign on some blank papers while accused Deepak Kumar stated that no recovery was effected from and he has been falsely implicated.
Arguments:-
21. Ld. SPP for NCB Submitted that by evidence of recovery witnesses PW1 Mr. M. S. Bhandari, PW2 Mr. C. S. Rai, PW4 Mr. Rajesh Kumar, PW20 Mr. Jay Bhagwan, PW5 Mr. S. K. Sharma, PW14 Mr. Kamal Saxena, the recovery of parcel on 13.07.2022 from the Head Post Office Lodhi Road and 5 cardboard boxes from the house of accused Amit Panday has been proved. It has SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29 KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:09:19 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 33 of 48further been argued by Ld. SPP for NCB that PW14 Mr. Kamal Saxena is the owner of the house in which accused Amit Panday was residing and he has also deposed about the recovery from the house of accused Amit. Ld. SPP for NCB further argued that by way of FSL report, which has been proved by the FSL witnesses i.e. PW9 Mr. B. S. Bisht, PW13 Mr. S. K. Singh, PW16 Aman Pal, PW18 Ms. Seema Srivasatav, PW19 Mr. K. M. Varshey, it has been proved that from the parcels at Post Office and from the five cardboard boxes, there is recovery of alprazolem, amphetamine, hydocodone bitartarate, acetaminophen, diazapem, lorazepam, zolpidem, clonazepam were detected. It is further argued by Ld. SPP that the samples were duly sealed when they were received in the FSL, therefore, there is nothing on record to show any tampering with the samples. It is further argued by Ld. SPP for NCB that accused Deepak was involved in sending the parcel of psychotropic substance with the accused Amit Panday, the parcels were booked through accused Deepak, even there is recovery of psychotropic substance from house of Amit Panday during the raid and 159 parcels recovered from the Head Post office were destined, UK, USA, Australia thereby the accused persons may be convicted.
22. Ld. counsel for accused Deepak on the another hand argued that prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case. It is further argued by the Ld. counsel for accused that the 159 Parcels of brown colour was having the address of consignor as M/s Bhagwati Traders RZ-J-16 Raj Nagar-I, Gali NO. 1, Palam Colony, New Delhi and M/s Bhagwati Traders, 1390, Paposian Delhi but no investigation has been carried by the NCB officials Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:09:26 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 34 of 48with respect to M/s Bhagwati Traders while as per the statement of Mr. Kailash Chand, Senior Post Master, the parcel was booked by one Mr. Ashok Kumar Tripathi but said Ashok Kumar Tripathi has never been made a witness in this matter by the department, though, the NCB recorded the statement of Mr. A. K. Tripathi under Section 67 of NDPS Act and he stated that he received the parcel from one Mr. Praveen Kumar agent of M/s Bhagwati Traders, even the statement of Mr. Praveen Kumar was recorded u/s 67 of NDPS Act and he stated that the parcels were given to him by the accused Deepak Kumar. It is further argued by the Ld. counsel for accused deepak that even the said Mr. Praveen Kumar has not been made a witness by the prosecution therefore, there is nothing on record by the prosecution to link the present accused with the alleged recovery of 159 parcels recovered from post office, New Delhi. It is further argued by the Ld. counsel for accused Deepak that nothing incriminating was recovered from the possession of accused Deepak and the only thing against the accused Deepak is the statement of co-accused Amit Panday u/s 67 NDPS Act which is hit by judgment of Tofan Singh Vs. State Of Tamilnadu Criminal Appeal No.152 of 2013 decided on 29.10.2020. It is further argued by Ld. Counsel for Deepak that there is no CDR connectivity brought on record by the NCB to show any link between accuse Amit Panday and Deepak therefore, prays for acquittal of accused.
23. Ld. counsel for accused Deepak relied upon the following judgments:-
1.Eze Val Okacy v/s NCB 2005 (1) CCC 72, Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:09:32 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.Page No. 35 of 48
2. Emma Charlotte Eve v/s NCB 200 (2) JCC (Delhi) 331,
3. NCB v/s Sukhdev Raj Sodhi 2011 (5) LRC 74,
4. Nnadi K. Iheanyi versus NCB 2014 [4] JCC [Narcotics] 182,
5. Darshan Singh versus State of Haryana 2016 (1) RCR (Criminal),
6. Eze Val Okeke@ Val Eze versus NCB 116 (2005) DELHI LAW TIMES 399. Crl. Appeal No. 720/2003,
7. Ritesh Chakrvarti versus State of Madhya Pradesh JT 2006 (12) SC 416,
8. Sumit Rai @ Subodh Rai versus State Crl. A No. 578/2017 (Delhi High Court),
9. Bahadur Singh versus State of Madhya Pradesh 2002 [1] JCC 12,
10. State of Rajasthan versus Gurmail Singh 2005 I AD (Cr.) S.C. 554,
11. DRI Versus Raj Kumar Mehta & Ors. 2011 [3] JCC [Narcotics] 156 and
12. Gunesh Kumar v/s State 2016 VII A.D. (Delhi) 249.
24. Ld. counsel for accused Amit Panday also adopted the abovesaid submissions of Ld. counsel for accused Deepak and further submitted that there is discrepancy in the statement of the officials of NCB with respect to time of reaching at the house of the accused Amit Panday, number of the house whether it was 224 or 224A, Ground Floor, Block S, Pandav Nagar, New Delhi. Ld. counsel for accused Amit Panday further argued that there Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 SIROHI 15:12:49 +0530 Session Case No.: 8565/16 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 36 of 48are different versions NCB officials with respect to the raid to the house of accused Amit Panday as some of the officials said that the accused Deepak Verma was served on 20.07.2012 by the NCB team after leaving the NCB office for the house of Amit Panday and some of the NCB team members of raiding party have stated the whole team went together to the house of accused Amit Panday and came back to the NCB office, therefore, there is doubt with respect to version of team of NCB when they raided the house of Amit Panday. It is further argued by the Ld. counsel for accused Amit Panday that no rent agreement of Amit Panday and owner of house has been placed on record, no document to show that PW14 Mr. kamal Kumar Saxena was the owner of the house is placed on record by NCB. It is further argued by the Ld. counsel for accused Amit Panday that there were other tenants also but they are not made witnesses and the friend of PW8 namely Mr. Harish Chand Juneja was made witness in this matter through Mr. Harish Chand Junja was living far away from the area of recovery therefore, so called independent witnesses are planted witnesses of NCB. It is further argued by the Ld. counsel for accused Amit Panday that there is discrepancy in the statement of NCB officials with respect to the house where Amit Panday was residing whether it was single storey or multi storey, all these contradictions occurred as the NCB officials did not go to the spot and planted the recovery on accused Amit Panday. It is further argued by the Ld. counsel for accused Amit Panday that senior NCB officials i.e. PW21 Mr. Manoranjan Kumar, Zonal Director and PW17 Mr. Kuldeep Singh Chauhan are not aware how many seals NCB has, Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:12:55 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 37 of 48therefore, chances of false implication can not be ruled out, hence, the accused Amit Panday may be acquitted as the story of the prosecution is false and fabricated and real culprits i.e. A. K. Tripathi and Praveen Kumar have been shielded by the NCB.
Discussion:-
25. The case of the NCB starts from receiving of secret information on 13.07.2022 at about 1300 hours thereafter the team was constituted of PW1 Mr. M. S. Bhandari, PW2 Mr. CS Rai, Mr. Rajender Ram Havildar, Mr. Anil and Rajesh Kumar Driver thereupon from the Lodhi Road, Head Post Office, 159 parcels of brown colour were seized and the address of the consignor on all the packets was of M/s Bhagwati Traders, RZ-J-
16, Raj Nagar-I, Gali no. 1, Palam Colony, New Delhi and M/s Bhagwati Traders, 1390, Paposian, Delhi. All the 159 packets were also affixed with the customs Declaration slip in which product was declared as Herbal Products and from these 159 packets following medicines were found: Tab Alprazoam, Tab Amphetamine, Tab Hydrocodone, Tab Lorazepam, Tab Acetaminophen and Codein Phasphate, Tab Zolpidem, Tab Zolpidem, Tab Alparazolam, Tab Clonzepam, Tab Diazepam and Tab Hydrocodone. It is further the case of NCB that the parcels were booked by Mr. Ashok Kumar Tripathy (A. K. Tripathy) Booking Agent thereafter the statement of A. K. Tripathy u/s 67 NDPS Act was recorded and he stated that the said parcels were given by Mr. Praveen Kumar agent of M/s Bhagwati Traders having office at J-16 Raj Nagar, Palam Colony, New Delhi and also at 1390, Paposian Delhi. Then statement of Praveen Kumar SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29 KUMAR SIROHI SIROHI 15:13:01 +0530 Session Case No.: 8565/16 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 38 of 48was recorded u/s 67 of NDPS Act and he disclosed that the said parcel was given to him by accused Deepak Kumar on 10.07.2022 for booking and also disclosed that Deepak Kumar collected the parcels from one Amit Panday resident of S 224, Ground Floor, Pandav Nagar, Delhi.
26. Ironically, for the reason best known to the NCB both Mr. A. K. Tripathy and Mr. Praveen have not been cited as a witness by the NCB, nor any reason has been put forward by the NCB why these persons have not been cited as witness. The parcels were booked by Mr. A. K. Tripathy and Mr. A. K. Tripathy got these parcels from Praveen Kumar. Mr. Praveen Kumar was agent of M/s Bhagwati Traders but no investigation has been conducted by the IO from M/s Bhagwati Traders whether the parcels in question was booked by Bhagwati Traders or not. There is nothing on record to show, if the story of the NCB is believed that the parcels were handed over to Mr. Praveen Kumar by accused Deepak Kumar, then in which condition the parcels were handed over or what were the contents of parcels which was delivered by accused Deepak Kumar to Mr. Praveen Kumar. Before booking the parcels, the parcel passed through hands of two persons namely Mr. Praveen Kumar and Mr. A. K. Tripathy as per case of NCB but both of these persons have not appeared to depose as to whether the parcels was tampered or not. The evidence led by NCB through its officials w.r.t. Mr. Ashok Kumar Tripathi and Mr. Parveen Kumar is not of any evidential value as the main witness Mr. Praveen Kumar who received the parcel from accused Deepak Kumar did not appear in the Court to depose anything about receiving parcels. It is also not Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR Session Case No.: 8565/16 KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors. SIROHI 15:13:09 +0530 Page No. 39 of 48 explained by the NCB why any investigation was not carried out with respect to the fact that when the parcels were given from accused Deepak Kumar then how Mr. Praveen Kumar agent of M/s Bhagwati Traders booked the same in the name of Bhagwati Traders and not in the name of Deepak Kumar. Here, it casts doubt on the investigation carried out by the NCB. Except u/s 67 of NDPS Act statement of Mr. A. K. Tripathi (Ex.PW1/F) and Mr. Praveen Kumar (Ex.PW20/A), there is nothing on record by NCB to connect accused Deepak Kumar and Amit Panday with recovery of 159 parcels and these statements of u/s 67 NDPS Act is of no value in absence of evidence of Mr. A. K. Tripahi and Mr. Praveen Kumar. Therefore, in the absence of testimony of Mr. Ashok Kumar Tripathy and Mr. Praveen Kumar it can not be said that any parcel was given by the accused Deepak Kumar to Mr. Praveen Kumar or the parcel which was recovered from the Lodhi Post office were handed over by the accused Deepak Kumar by accused Amit Panday.
27. It is further the case of NCB that the parcel was collected by accused Deepak Kumar from Amit Panday and once it is not proved by the NCB that 159 parcels recovered from post office were handed over by Deepak Kumar then the NCB also failed to prove that these parcels indeed were given by accused Amit Panday to accused Deepak Kumar for booking.
28. On 20.07.2012, the team of NCB raided house of accused Amit Panday bearing no. S-224 Ground Floor, Pandav Nagar, New Delhi. The team consisted of PW1 Mr. M. S Bhandari, PW2 Mr. C.S. Rai, PW4 Mr. Rajesh Kumar, PW5 Mr. S. K. Sharma, SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29 KUMAR SIROHI SIROHI 15:13:15 +0530 Session Case No.: 8565/16 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 40 of 48PW15 Narender Kumar, PW20 Jai Bhagwan and two independent persons, one is owner of the house, PW14 Kamal Kumar Saxena and PW11 Mr. Harish Chand Juneja is cited as independent witnesses.
29. No ownership documents of the property bearing no. S- 224, Ground Floor, Pandav Nagar, New Delhi in the name of PW14 Mr. Kamal Kumar Saxena has been filed by the NCB, therefore, there is nothing on record to show that the PW14 was the owner of the house in which the accused Amit Panday was residing that too in the absence of any rent agreement or rent receipt between accused Amit Panday and PW14 Mr. Kamal Kumar Saxena.
30. All the abovesaid witnesses have deposed about the recovery of 5 card boxes of different sizes, one black and four khaki colour from the room of accused Amit Panday and in total 73760 tablets of different medicines were recovered. As per PW1 Mr. M.M.S. Bhandari, 12 different types of medicines were present in the card board. 40 tablets of each kind of medicine were taken as sample i.e. two strips of 20 tablets each and they were put in white paper envelope and were sealed by the seal of NCB. It is admitted case of NCB that neither the batch number of the recovered medicines nor the manufactured of the tablets was contacted in order to know whether the medicines recovered were manufactured by their unit or not. Only two strips of each medicine were taken up by the NCB officials. None of NCB officials has deposed that the batch number of all the medicines recovered were same. PW2 Mr. C. S. Rai has deposed that no test SUDHIR Digitally by SUDHIR signed KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29 KUMAR SIROHI Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:13:23 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 41 of 48was done by them using the field testing kit with respect to medicines recovered from the house of accused Amit Panday. PW2 Mr. C. S. Rai during cross examination also deposed that "It is correct that in any of the seizure in this case we did not record the particulars of the medicines recovered including the name of the manufacturer or the batch number. On being asked why the particulars of the seized material were not recorded, the witness states that it was our decision. I do not want to say anything more on this". Therefore once, it is on record that neither the manufacturer nor the batch details have been mentioned then the two strips of each medicines recovered from accused Amit Panday is not the representative samples of the medicines recovered and it can not be said that the remaining lot which was not taken as samples were having the same ingredients as that of sample drawn.
31. PW2 Mr. CS Rai who was the main member of raiding team has deposed in cross examination that they met two independent witnesses 10 to 15 meters from the house of accused first one was Kamal Saxena (PW14) and second one was Mr. Harish Chand Juneja (PW11), who was a passerby and agreed to join the investigation. While PW14 Mr. Kamal Saxena during his evidence stated that on 20.07.2012 at about 10 to 1015 am he was standing outside his house when NCB officials came to him, NCB officials also told him that two witnesses are required and requested him to join one more person then he called his friend Mr. Harish Chand Juneja to come and stand as a witness, therefore, this shows that the PW11 Mr. Harish Chand Juneja was not passerby rather he was called by PW14, the house of Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:13:29 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 42 of 48PW11 Mr. Harish Chand Juneja is at Silverpark Shivpuri Delhi situated 8 km from the house of PW14. PW14 Mr. Kamal Kumar Saxena has deposed that he did not hand over the documents with respect to ownership of S-224, Pandav Nagar, Delhi but he stated that he submitted that police verification report and rent agreement to the NCB officials but no such verification report or rent agreement has been placed on record by the NCB. PW14 also deposed that he used to collect rent and it the house S-224 was having three floors, all the floors were occupied by tenants and tenants were available on the date of raid by the NCB but NCB officials did not call the tenants to be independent witness for reasons best known to them. PW4 Mr. Rajesh Kumar (member of the raiding team) deposed that the house of the accused Amit Panday was a single storey house but PW8 (PW14) has deposed that S-224 consists of 4 stories. Accordingly, there is contradiction between the deposition of NCB witnesses with respect to house S-224, Pandav Nagar Delhi and this becomes more important as no document regarding the ownership of S- 224 in favour of PW14 Mr. Kamal Saxena has been filed and even the other witness PW11 Harish Chand Juneja as claimed by the NCB to be independent witness turned out to be friend of PW14 even he was not living in the same locality rather PW11 was residing 8 km away from S-224 Pandav Nagar and the other tenants living in the same building who were available on spot are not made witness in this case and no explanation has been put forward by the NCB how PW11 who resided at 8 km away from place of raid was immediately available at time of raid.
Digitally signed SUDHIR by SUDHIR
KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI
Date: 2023.04.29
SIROHI 15:13:36 +0530
Session Case No.: 8565/16
NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 43 of 48
32. Next important aspect on date of raid i.e. 20.07.2012 at house of accused Amit Panday, is service of notice u/s 67 NDPS Act on the accused Deepak Panday. Notice u/s 67 Ex.PW5/DA was served on accused Deepak on 20.07.2012 by PW5 Mr. S. K. Sharma member of the raiding party and he deposed that on 20.07.2021 he was told by PW2 Mr. CS Rai to accompany him to Pandav Nagar as member of raiding team then PW2 gave him directions to serve notice on accused Deepak at his address Pana Paposian at Narela thereafter PW5 alongwith Sudhir Nayak, Frash and driver Raj Kumar left in the government vehicle and on reaching the said place i.e. H. No. 1407 Pana Paposian he served notice u/s 67 of NDPS Act on accused Deepak Kumar and asked him to come to NCB office at 02.00 pm, accused Deepak appeared before him in the NCB office but during cross examination PW5 deposed that on 20.07.2022 he was member of the raiding party and he left the NCB office at about 08.00 to 08.30 am. PW5 during cross examination further deposed that before entering in Pandav Nagar he was asked by PW2 Mr. C.S. Rai to go to Narela to serve summons u/s 67 on the accuse Deepak Kumar but the deposition of PW1 Mr. M.M.S. Bhandari is totally different and PW1 MMS Bhandari has deposed that on 20.07.2012, the team first went to Deepak and from there they went to Amit house therefore, the other member of raiding team has totally changed the story and now the whole team of NCB went to house of Deepak. PW2 CS Rai has deposed that he, Mr. MMS Bhandari, IO Rajesh Kumar, IO Jai Bhagwan IO S. K. Sharma, Sepoy narender Kumar, Frash Sudhir Kumar, driver Rajesh Kumar and Driver Sanjeev went to Pandav Nagar at 07.20 Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI Date: 2023.04.29 Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:13:42 +0530 NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 44 of 48and reached at 10.00 am but he did not disclsoed anyting in his examination in chief with respect to going to the house of accused Deepak Kumar but during his cross examination he stated "It is correct that I was member of the team that had gone to the residence of accused Deepak Kumar on 20/7/2012. I had not gone to the residence of accused Deepak Kumar. I was in another car and other team members had gone to bring accused Deepak Kumar. We had reached the residence of accused Deepak Kumar around 8:30 8:45 a.m. on 20/7/2012. The team members had brought Deepak Kumar from his residence within 15-20 minutes of our reaching there. I do not know if any search of the premises of accused Deepak Kumar had taken place or if anything was seized from his premises. I do not know if the team had brought Deepak Kumar from his residence or from his shop. Thereafter we had gone straight to Pandav Nagar from where we had picked accused Deepak Kumar. I had no interaction with accused Deepak Kumar but other team members told me that he had been served summons to appear in the office of NCB. Accused Deepak Kumar had not gone with us to Pandav Nagar. We had gone to S-224, Pandav Nagar based on the information marked to me as received by Sh. Jai Bhagwan, IO. I do not know such information was received from accused Deepak. The search authorisation in regard to S-224, Pandav Nagar was received by me prior to going to the premises of Deepak Kumar. I had no search authorisation for the search of premises of Deepak Kumar. The premises of Deepak Kumar were located in Narela. I cannot say whether such search authorisation was available with other team members or not.
SUDHIR Digitally
by SUDHIR
signed
KUMAR KUMAR SIROHI
Date: 2023.04.29
Session Case No.: 8565/16 SIROHI 15:13:49 +0530
NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 45 of 48
33. We reached S-224, Pandav Nagar around 10 O'clock. We had first gone to Narela before going to Pandav Nagar. There was no direction with us to go to Narela. I had no information about the address of Deepak Kumar but the same was available with Sh. Rajesh Kumar, 10. We had left for Narela around 7:15 a.m. We took about 1 hour to reach the premises of Amit Panday. Again said that Deepak was not brought by the team with us nor did he accompany us to Pandav Nagar. I do not know if any summons were served upon Deepak Kumar. I did not see the summons being served upon Deepak. I had also not seen Deepak on that day. It is correct that I had deposed falsely in my chief that we had left from our office for S-224, Pandav Nagar, Delhi on 20/7/2012 at around 7:20 am". Therefore, story of PW2 Mr. C. S. Rai is totally different from PW1 and PW5. Even the official of NCB/PW2 has admitted in his examination he has deposed falsely that they went to Pandav Nagar directly from NCB office at 07.20 am therefore, what reliance can be placed upon the evidence of such officials when the case of NCB is full of lacunas. It is further casts a doubt on the story of NCB that if they went to the house of accused Deepak and accused Deepak is involved in banned medicines then why search was not conducted at his house and only search was conducted at the house of accused Amit Panday. NCB first got information about accused Amit Panday from Mr. Praveen Kumar statement u/s 67 of NDPS Act (Ex.PW20A) but Mr. Praveen Kumar never appeared as witness to depose that he disclosed anything about Amit Panday to NCB officials.
Digitally signed by SUDHIR SUDHIR KUMAR
KUMAR SIROHI
Date: 2023.04.29
Session Case No.: 8565/16
SIROHI 15:13:55 +0530
NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 46 of 48
34. The next defence of the accused persons is with respect to the seal. PW21 Mr. Manoranjan Kumar, Zonal Director NCB has deposed that he does not remember as to how many seals were available in the NCB. It is an important aspect as to how many seals were present in the NCB or whether officials of NCB has extra seals to seal case property can't be ruled out. As if one seal is given to officials for raid then how many remaining seals were present with the Incharge of seal is not brought on record by NCB, this fact become more important in view of the manner of investigation in present matter, joint reading of the loopholes in the case of NCB that is with respect to non joining of Mr. A. K. Tripathy, Mr. Praveen Kumar, non joining independent witnesses, contradictions with respect to PW14 about ownership of house, the service of summons to accused Deepak at the time of raid to the house of accused Amit Panday, absence of representative samples, no investigation with respect to manufacturer of medicines and batch number of medicines, no investigation with respect to M/s Bhagwati Trader the consignor of 159 parcels which were recovered from the post office. There is no other link between accused Amit Panday and Deepak Kumar except statement of Mr. Praveen Kumar who was not cited as witness, no CDR connectivity or any other evidence to link accused persons with each other has been brought on record by NCB. No explanation was put by NCB if accused Deepak was involved in supplying medicines then why only house of accused Amit was searched, even personal search of accused Deepak Kumar was also not conducted.
SUDHIR Digitally
by SUDHIR
signed
KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29
KUMAR SIROHI
SIROHI 15:14:01 +0530
Session Case No.: 8565/16
NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 47 of 48
35. The whole case of NCB is scattered and is full of lacunas is the duty of the NCB to prove its case beyond its reasonable doubts. NCB has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Final verdict:
36. In view of the abovesaid discussions, when NCB has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, accordingly, accused Deepak Kumar is acquitted of the offence u/s 22 r/w 29 NDPS Act and 23 (c) r/w Section 28 and 29 of NDPS Act. Accused Amit Panday is also acquitted of offence u/s 22 r/w Section 29 NPDS Act, 23(c) r/w Section 28 & 29 of NDPS Act and 22 (c) of NDPS Act. Separate order has been passed for compliance of bail bond u/s 437-A CrPC.
Announced in the open court
on 29.04.2023
SUDHIR Digitally signed by
SUDHIR KUMAR SIROHI
KUMAR Date: 2023.04.29
SIROHI 15:14:08 +0530
(SUDHIR KUMAR SIROHI)
ASJ (SPECIAL JUDGE) NDPS Act,
New Delhi District, PHC, ND
Session Case No.: 8565/16
NCB Vs Amit Panday & Ors.
Page No. 48 of 48