Himachal Pradesh High Court
State Of Himachal Pradesh vs Pyare Lal on 29 September, 2016
Bench: Sanjay Karol, Ajay Mohan Goel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No 192 of 2012.
.
Reserved on: 19.09.2016.
Decided on: 29.09.2016.
State of Himachal Pradesh. ....Appellant.
Versus
Pyare Lal ... Respondent.
________________________________________________________________________ of Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
For the appellant rt Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes _____________________________________________________________ : Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Addl. AG with Mr. Vikram Thakur and Punit Rajta, Dy. AG.
For the respondent : Mr. B.S. Chauhan, Advocate.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge By way of this appeal, the State has challenged the judgment passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, Fast Track Court, Shimla, in Sessions Trial No. 9-S/7 of 2011, dated 19.01.2012, vide which, learned Trial Court acquitted the present respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'accused') for commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b) (ii) (B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act (in short 'NDPS Act').
1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 22. The case of the prosecution in brief was that on 11.10.2009, at around 7:25 a.m., Dy. S.P. Maan Singh .
alongwith ASI Het Ram and other police officials was present at place Balag in connection with patrolling, traffic checking and crime detection duty in official vehicle bearing registration No. HP-03-2170. Further as per the prosecution, Dy. S.P. Maan Singh received secret information to the effect of that one man wearing blue coloured coat was traveling in Basadhar-Solan bus and this person was carrying a blue rt coloured bag in his hand which contained narcotic substance.
On receipt of said information, Dy. S.P. sent information under Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act to Superintendent of Police, Shimla through Const. Bhupinder Singh and other members of the patrolling party proceeded towards Naina Kainchi side. At around 7:45 a.m. a private bus came from Basadhar side and the same was signaled to be stopped by the police party. Thereafter, the police party boarded the bus from both the doors and Dy. S.P. spotted one person, resembling the description as per the information given to him by the informant, who was sitting on seat No. 32 and he was also having one blue coloured bag in his right hand. When this person saw the police party, he got perplexed, stood on ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 3 his seat and tried to run away, however, the police party nabbed him with the help of Sita Ram and Om Prakash, other .
passengers of the bus sitting on seat No. 35 and 36 respectively. The accused disclosed his name as Pyare Lal and when he failed to give satisfactory answers to the queries put to him by Dy.S.P, he was apprised of his right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate and after the of accused consented to be searched by the SDPO, the consent memo and search memo qua personal search given by the rt police officials to the accused, was prepared which was duly signed by the witnesses and the accused in the presence of driver and conductor of the bus. Further as per the prosecution, during the course of search of the bag, police party found one plastic envelop having inscription 'Baba Cloth House' inside the blue coloured bag and when said envelop was opened, it was found containing black coloured substance which was in the form of sticks and wicks. After physical examination of that black coloured substance, it was found to be charas. During the personal search of the accused, the police party recovered a ticket from inner pocket of his coat. In the meantime, one local inhabitant Inder Sharma was sent to bring scale and weights, with the help of ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 4 which, charas was weighed and same was found to be 1 Kg.
The charas was put in the same plastic envelop and that .
plastic envelop was again put in the same blue coloured bag and thereafter it was wrapped in a piece of cloth in the shape of a pulinda and pulinda was sealed with eight seals having impression 'T'. Sample of seal was taken on a piece of cloth and thereafter the seal after use and after taking specimen of of the same was entrusted to witness Sita Ram. The Investigating Officer filled the NCB form in triplicate and took rt into possession the pulinda containing the charas. Recovery and seizure memo to this effect were also prepared which were signed by the accused and other witnesses. Dy. S.P. sent ruka through Constable Tashi Negi to the Police Station, on the basis of which, FIR was registered. During the course of investigation, the investigating officer prepared site plan, recorded the statements of witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C') and formally arrested the accused. Case property was deposited with MHC and special report was prepared. The case property was sent to FSL, Junga for chemical analysis and after receipt of the report of FSL, Junga, quantity of resin in the lot of charas was found to be 30.09 w/w. After the completion of investigation, ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 5 challan was filed in the Court and as a prima-facie case was found against the accused, accordingly, he was charged for .
commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b) (ii) (B) of the NDPS Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. Learned trial Court on the basis of material produced on record by the prosecution held that the of prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused for commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b) (ii) rt (B) of the NDPS Act beyond reasonable doubt and on these basis, learned trial Court acquitted the accused. Learned trial Court took note of the fact that there were too many contradictions regarding the fact whether accused was wearing blue coloured coat or blue coloured jacket. First information under Section 42 of the NDPS Act clearly mentioned about blue coloured coat, but the police witnesses had stated that the accused was wearing blue coloured jacket.
As per the learned trial Court, as such, prosecution failed to link the accused with the charas recovered on the fateful day.
It was further held by the learned trial Court that there were contradictions and discrepancies in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and it was the basic law that when two ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 6 views are possible, then benefit has to be given to the accused. Learned trial Court also held that the discrepancies .
in the statements of prosecution witnesses casts cloud on the prosecution story and accordingly, on these bases, it was concluded by the learned trial Court that prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was found in conscious and exclusive possession of the of contraband while traveling in a private bus from Basadhar to Sola. rt
4. Mr. V.S. Chauhan, learned Additional Advocate General has strenuously argued that the judgment passed by the learned trial Court was perverse and not sustainable as the findings returned by the learned trial Court were not borne out from the records of the case. It was argued by Mr. Chauhan that learned trial Court discarded the reliable testimony of prosecution witnesses for untenable reasons and the judgment of acquittal in fact was a result of total discarding of material on record by the learned trial Court. It was further argued by Mr. Chauhan that learned trial Court failed to appreciate that the recovery of the contraband from the accused was categorically proved by PW5 HC Sunil Kumar, PW10 Constable Tashi Negi, PW16 Dy.S.P. Maan ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 7 Singh and PW17 ASI Het Ram. It was further argued by Mr. Chauhan that even the testimony of PW2 Nagender, who .
otherwise had turned hostile, proved the case of the prosecution. Mr. Chauhan further argued that in fact learned trial Court had erred in not appreciating the evidence produced on record by the prosecution in its correct perspective and on these bases, it was urged by Mr. Chauhan of that the judgment passed by the learned trial Court was not sustainable and same be set aside and the accused be rt convicted for commission of offence for which he was charged.
5. On the other hand, Mr. B.S. Chauhan, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent argued that there was no merit in the present appeal as the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court in favour of accused was neither perverse nor it could be said that the findings returned by the learned trial Court were not borne out from the records of the case. Mr. B.S. Chauhan further argued that the so called independent witnesses, in whose presence the alleged recovery was effected, had turned hostile and further there were major contradictions and discrepancies in the testimonies of PW5, PW10, PW16 and PW17, which created doubt over the case of the prosecution.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 8It was further argued by Mr. B.S. Chauhan that the learned trial Court had taken into consideration all these aspects of .
the matter and after a careful scrutiny of the entire evidence adduced on record, it was held by the learned trial Court that the prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. As per Mr. B.S. Chauhan, there was no infirmity in the findings returned by the learned trial of Court and accordingly it was submitted by him that there was no merit in the appeal and the same be dismissed.
rt
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the records of the case as well as the judgment passed by the learned trial Court.
7. As per the case of the prosecution, accused was apprehended by the police while traveling in a private bus coming from Basadhar side on 11.10.2009, at around 7:45 a.m. while he was sitting on seat No. 32 with a blue coloured bag in his right hand who got perplexed and tried to fled away as soon as he saw the police entering the said bus from the doors of the same. It is further the case of the prosecution that the accused was nabbed with the help of Sita Ram and Om Prakash, passengers who were sitting on seat No. 35 and 36 of the said bus.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 98. Sita Ram entered the witness box as PW1 and deposed that on 11.10.2009 he boarded the bus in issue from .
Sher Jalana at around 6:15 a.m. and one forest worker namely Om Prakash was also with him. He further stated that both of them were seated on a three seater seat of the bus probably seat Nos. 34-35 or 35-36. He further stated that a male was sitting alongwith them. He further stated that at of Kuthar, the bus stopped and many persons boarded the bus.
He further stated that between 7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m., when rt bus reached Naina Kainchi, a Police Gypsy was there and police personnel signaled the bus to stop and got it parked by the side of the road. As per him, police personnel boarded the bus from front and rear doors. He deposed that the bus was jam packed and on the seat just ahead of them, two men and a lady were sitting. He deposed that in the space/corridor of the bus, there was a bag just by the side of the seat ahead of them. He stated that the police picked up that bag and told them as well as the three persons sitting on the seat ahead of them to come down alongwith 4-5 other persons who were also sitting in the bus. He deposed that driver and conductor of the bus were also asked to remain there and thereafter that black coloured bag was searched. He deposed that from that ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 10 bag, a black coloured substance, wrapped in a black cloth, was recovered. He further deposed that police sent a person to .
fetch weights and scale from nearby village Balag. He deposed that thereafter the recovered substance was weighed which was one kilogram. He further stated that black coloured substance was 'sulfa'. He deposed that thereafter the recovered substance was packed in a white coloured cloth and of sealed and on that parcel his and Om Prakash's signatures were taken. He also deposed that besides them 7-8 other rt persons also signed that parcel. He further stated that their signatures as well as signatures of 7-8 person other persons on some other papers alongwith signatures of driver and conductor of the bus were also obtained. As this witness did not support the case of the prosecution, he was declared as a hostile witness. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, he stated that he had put his signatures on 3-4 papers which were not blank but he had not gone through their contents. He further stated that he could not say as to what was the number of the seat just in front of him. He further stated that it was wrong that when police entered the bus, the accused got perplexed. He also denied that the accused was having a bag on his shoulder and when accused ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 11 saw the police he tried to run away and was nabbed by him and Om Prakash. This witness further stated it to be wrong .
that police had asked the accused that he was free to take personal search of the police officials and in that regard memo Ext. PW1/B was prepared.
9. Conductor of the bus entered the witness box as PW2 and he also did not support the case of the prosecution.
of This witness deposed in the Court that he was Conductor in bus bearing registration No. HP-16-2185 of 'Jaswal Bus rt Service' and the bus was on its way from Basadhar to Solan.
He further stated that on the fateful day, at Naina Kainchi, at around 8:00 a.m. the bus was stopped by the police and they got the bus parked by the side of the road. He further deposed that the police entered the bus from both front as well as rear doors and both he and the driver of the bus were outside the bus at the relevant time. He further deposed that police took out a bag from underneath the seat which was between seat numbers 30-35. He further stated that that it was the policemen who came out of the bus with that bag and the person who was having that bag was not feeling well. He deposed that thereafter said bag was checked in their presence and from the bag a tiffin was found and on opening ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:23 :::HCHP 12 the tiffin, a blue coloured bag was taken out and in that blue coloured bag charas was found.
.
10. Next material witness of the prosecution is PW6 Inder Sharma who also did not support the case of the prosecution and was declared as hostile witness. This witness stated that he owned a Motorcycle bearing registration No. HP-09A-1172. He further stated that while he was going on of his Motorcycle, police stopped him at place Naina Kainchi. He denied that police party asked him to bring scale from Balag.
rt In his further cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, he stated it to be incorrect that he brought the scale and weights from Sharma Hardware, Balag and charas was weighed in his presence. He further stated that he did not know Pyare Lal and he had seen him (Pyare Lal) for the first time in the Court only.
11. PW7 Nirdosh Sharma, also did not support the case of the prosecution and as such, he was declared as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor he stated it to be incorrect that Inder Sharma came to his shop at 8:10 a.m. on 11.10.2009 and asked to give him scales for weighing charas. He also stated it to be incorrect that he had given the weights and scale to Inder ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 13 Sharma, which he (Inder Sharma) returned after sometime.
He further denied that he knew Pyare Lal personally and .
stated that he was seeing the accused Pyare Lal for the first time in the Court only.
12. HC Suneel Kumar entered the witness box as PW5. In his deposition, HC Sunil Kumar, who was the member of the police party along with SDPO DSP Mann of Singh, ASI Het Ram, C. Bhupinder Singh, C. Tashi Negi, stated that when they reached at place Balag at around 7:25 rt a.m., then Dy. S.P. received a secret information that one man wearing a blue coloured jacket was coming in Basadhar-Solan bus. Dy.S.P. prepared special report and sent the same to S.P. Shimla through C. Bhupinder Singh. This witness further deposed that after the bus in issue was signaled to stop and the driver parked the bus by the side of the road, Dy.S.P. and one Constable boarded the bus from the front door and he and ASI Het Ram entered the bus from the rear door. This witness further deposed that one passenger who was sitting on seat No. 32, on seeing the police, stood up from his seat and tried to flee away. He further deposed that the passengers sitting on seat No. 35 and 36 caught him. He further stated that this person was having a bag in his hand and he was ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 14 also wearing a blue coloured jacket. He further deposed that when the bag which was being carried by the accused was .
opened by the Dy.S.P then a polythene bag was found inside it and when that polythene bag was opened, a black coloured substance was found in the same. He deposed that on physical verification, that black coloured substance was found to be charas and memo Ext. PW1/C to this effect was of prepared by Dy.S.P. This witness was shown one seal parcel Ext. P-1 which with the permission of the Court was opened rt in the Court. On opening the same, blue coloured bag Ext. P-
2, yellow ply bag Ext. P-3, white poly bag Ext. P-4 and charas Ext. P-5 were stated to be the same by this witnesses which were recovered from the accused.
13. Next relevant witness is PW10 Constable Tashi Negi. This witness deposed that in the year 2009 he was posted as driver at Police Station, Theog and on 11.10.2009, Dy.S.P. Maan Singh, ASI Het Ram, C. Bhupinder Singh and HC Suneel Kumar went towards Sainj-Balag side in connection with patrolling in vehicle No. HP-03-2170. He further stated that when police party reached at Balag at around 7:25 a.m., Dy.S.P. received a secret information that one man wearing blue coloured jacket is coming in Basadhar-
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 15Solan bus and was in possession of narcotic substance.
Thereafter this witness deposed about the factum of bus being .
signaled to be stopped by the police party. He also deposed with regard to the factum of accused trying to flee when he saw the Dy.S.P. He also stated that accused was sitting on seat No. 32 and there was a bag in his hand and he was wearing a blue coloured jacket. He further stated that when of the bag being carried out by the accused was opened by the police, one polythene bag was found inside the same and rt when that polythene bag was opened, Dy.S.P found a black coloured substance in the same, which on physical verification, was found to be charas. In his cross examination he admitted that no personal search of any passenger was conducted outside the bus. He further stated that all passengers remained inside the bus during the search conducted by the police party.
14. Dy.S.P Maan Singh entered the witness box as PW16 and he stated that on 11.10.2009 while he was posted as SDPO Theog, they went for traffic checking and crime detection duty towards Balag-Sainj side after making necessary entry in this regard. He stated that he alongwith ASI Het Ram, HC Sunil Kumar, Const. Bhupinder went for ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 16 this purpose in their official vehicle which was being driven by Constable Tashi Negi. He stated that they started from Police .
Station Theog at around 6:45 a.m. He further stated that when police party reached at place Balag, he received a secret information that one man, wearing a blue coloured jacket and having a blue coloured bag was coming in Basadhar-Solan bus and there were reasons that he was having narcotic of substance. He stated that on receiving said information, he prepared special report under Section 42 of the NDPS Act Ext.
rt PW11/A and handed over the same to Constable Bhupinder Singh with the direction to take the same to S.P. Office, Shimla. He further stated that police party went to Naina Kainchi and waited for the bus and after sometime the bus in issue came and the police party entered the bus. He further stated that he spotted the accused sitting on seat No. 32, having similar appearance as told by the informer, who on seeing the police party tried to flee away but was nabbed with the help of passengers Sita Ram and Om Prakash and other police officials. He further stated that he took the accused outside the bus and apprised him of his legal right of being searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate but the accused opted to be searched by the police. Thereafter this ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 17 witness deposed with regard to search and seizure which was carried out at the spot. In his cross examination, he stated it .
to be incorrect that the bag in issue was brought out from the bus by HC Sunil Kumar. He self stated that bag was in the hand of accused Pyare Lal and further stated that he did not remember the colour of the bag. He stated that they did not take into possession the blue coat which accused was wearing of on the fateful day. He further stated that there was no passenger standing inside the bus and all passengers were rt sitting on their seats.
15. ASI Het Ram entered the witness box as PW 17 and he also corroborated the case of the prosecution. He has mentioned in his examination in chief that after the bus was signaled to be stopped, Dy.S.P. boarded the bus from the front door whereas he and HC Sunil Kumar entered the bus from the rear door. He further stated that personal search of the passengers was conducted inside the bus and passengers whose personal search was conducted by Dy.S.P. got down from the bus and the moment Dy.S.P. reached near seat No. 32, the passenger wearing blue coloured coat tried to ran away but was nabbed with the help of passengers sitting on seat Nos. 35 and 36. He further deposed that that the man ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 18 was having a blue coloured bag in his hand. During the course of his statement, one sealed parcel Ext. P-1 was shown .
to him and he identified the blue coloured bag Ext. P-2, yellow poly bag Ext. P-3, while Poly bag Ext. P-4 and charas Ext. P-5 to be the same which were recovered from the accused.
16. It is apparent from the discussion of the testimony of the material witnesses of the prosecution that no of independent witness has corroborated or supported the case of the prosecution. Whereas Sita Ram has denied that the rt accused was apprehended and nabbed in the mode and manner as the prosecution wants this Court to believe, the other passenger who according to the prosecution was helpful in nabbing the accused namely Om Prakash was given up by the learned Public Prosecutor and he was not examined.
Though it is the case of the prosecution that when the accused tried to run away and was nabbed, he was carrying a blue coloured bag and when this bag was opened, charas was found from the same, however, it has come in the testimony of PW1 Sita Ram Sharma as well as PW2 Naginder, the conductor of the bus, that the bag from which charas was recovered was brought out of the bus by the police official.
Besides this, it has come in the testimony of PW5 HC Sunil ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 19 Kumar as well as PW16 Dy.S.P. Maan Singh that accused was wearing a blue coloured jacket whereas PW17 ASI Het Ram .
has stated that the accused was wearing a blue coloured coat.
Further suggestion which was given to PW1 during his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor was to the effect that accused was having the bag on his shoulder, however, statements of PW5 HC Sunil Kumar, PW16 Dy.S.P. Maan of Singh and PW17 Het Ram are to the effect that the accused was carrying the bag, from which the charas was recovered, rt in his hand.
17. It has come in the testimony of PW5 and PW 17 that inside blue coloured bag Ext. P-2, there was yellow poly bag Ext. P-3, while poly bag Ext. P-4 and charas Ext. P-5.
however, a perusal of the testimony of PW16 demonstrates that he has stated that when the bag Ext. P-2 was searched by the police, one yellow polythene bag Ext. P-3 was found inside that blue coloured bag in which stick shaped black coloured substance was found.
18. Another important aspect of the matter is that it has come in the testimony of PW5 and PW17 that when accused saw Dy.S.P. he tried to flee from the spot but he was apprehended by the passengers sitting on seat Nos. 35 and ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 20 36, however PW16 has stated that accused was nabbed with the help of passengers sitting on seat Nos. 35 and 36 as well .
as with the help of police officials.
19. There is another major contradiction in the testimony of Investigating Officer PW16 Dy.S.P. Maan Singh on one hand and PW5 HC Sunil Kumar and PW17 ASI Het Ram on the other with regard to the number of bags which of were found inside the blue coloured bag allegedly recovered from the accused. Whereas according to PW16, there was one rt polythene bag found inside the blue coloured bag being carried by the accused in which stick shaped black coloured substance was found, however, it has come in the testimony of PW5 HC Sunil Kumar and PW17 ASI Het Ram that in fact there were two polythene bags, one yellow polythene bag and one white polythene bag, inside blue coloured bag being carried by the accused. No plausible explanation has come from the side of prosecution as to why there is this contradiction in the testimony of PW16 on the one hand and PW5 and PW17 on the other hand.
20. Incidentally, PW2, the conductor of the bus has given a totally different version and as per him, the charas ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 21 was recovered from inside a tiffin which tiffin was recovered from the bag taken out from the bus by the police.
.
21. Besides this, according to PW5 and PW16, accused was wearing a blue coloured jacket, however, according to PW17 accused was wearing a blue colour coat at the relevant time.
22. The version of the prosecution that the charas was of recovered from the bag being carried by the accused has not been supported by independent witnesses PW1 as well as the rt conductor of the bus, PW2, according to whom, the bag in issue was taken out from the bus by the police officials themselves.
23. Whereas it has come in the testimony of PW1 that the bus was jam packed and PW2 has also stated that there were many passengers in the bus and many of them were also standing, however, PW16 has stated that there was no one standing inside the bus and all the passengers were sitting.
24. According to PW 10 Constable Tashi Negi no personal search of any passenger was conducted outside the bus and all the passengers remained inside the bus when personal search of the passengers was conducted by the police. However, PW16 has deposed that accused was taken ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 22 out of the bus by him and thereafter he apprised him of his legal right of to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a .
Magistrate.
25. It is apparent and evident from the perusal of the material placed on record by the prosecution that the testimony of prosecution witnesses is neither cogent nor reliable nor the same is trustworthy. In our considered view, of the abovementioned major contradictions, inconsistencies and discrepancies in the testimonies of the prosecution rt witnesses coupled with the fact that none of the independent witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution creates serious doubts about the veracity of the case of the prosecution.
26. A perusal of the judgment passed by the learned trial Court demonstrates that all these aspects of the matter have been gone into by the learned trial Court and after a careful examination of the entire evidence adduced on record by the prosecution, learned trial Court has came to the conclusion that the prosecution was not able to prove its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Learned trial Court has also taken note of the fact that there were discrepancies in the statements of prosecution witnesses with ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 23 regard to the mode and manner in which the search of the passengers took place. Learned trial Court held and rightly so .
that there were contradictions in the testimony of officials witnesses as to how the personal search of the police officials was done by the accused. There is also discrepancy in the contents of Ext. PW1/B as compared to the statement of the Investigating Officer which in fact creates doubt over the very of presence of the Investigating Officer on the spot. This fact of the matter has also been taken note of by the learned trial rt Court.
27. From the discussion held above, in our considered view, the finding of acquittal so returned by the learned trial Court is neither perverse, nor it can be said that the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court is not borne out from the records of the case. According to us also, from the material placed on record, the prosecution has not been able to prove its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
28. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Makhan Singh Versus State of Haryana, (2015) 12 Supreme Court Cases 247, that it is well settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that more stringent the punishment, ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP 24 the more heavy is the burden upon the prosecution to prove the offence. In the said case, Hon'ble Supreme Court went on .
to hold that when independent witnesses did not support the prosecution case and the recovery of contraband was not satisfactorily proved, conviction cannot be sustained.
Therefore, in view of the discussion held above, while concurring with the judgment passed by the learned of trial Court, we dismiss the present appeal being devoid of merits. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
rt (Sanjay Karol) Judge (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge 29th September, 2016.
(narender) ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:19:24 :::HCHP