Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

above said manner. He had also disclosed therein, inter-alia, that the co-accused Mandeep Singh is the son of his maternal uncle Sh Harbhajan Singh and about 20 days ago his above co-accused Mandeep Singh had called him at ISBT and had told him that he had brought 2 KG of heroin from Punjab and had sought his help to deliver the above heroin in Delhi as he was not aware about the roads of Delhi. It was also disclosed by the accused Gurudev Singh in his above statement that at that time he was working as a driver with some person/company and was running on leave and hence, he had agreed to the above proposal of his co-accused and had taken his co- accused to his residence at Trilokpuri and on the same day in the evening, they had gone near the Chand cinema in Kotla area and his co-accused had delivered the above 2 KG of heroin to some African person there.

79. Though, the IO/PW3 has not been able to trace out the source of supply or procurement etc of the above contraband substance and also though, no trace of the above Pindu, who used to supply heroin to the accused Mandeep Singh and on whose instructions the accused Mandeep Singh was delivering the contraband substance to an African person, could not be traced out and further SC No. 71A/07 DRI Vs Gurudev Singh & Anr.

accused persons on 04.05.2007, which only was relevant for the present case.

84. Again, the reference of one other Tata Safari vehicle of red colour had also come in the above statements of the accused persons, which is stated to have been used by them in transportation and delivery of a previous consignment of heroin weighing 6 kg and the above vehicle was arranged and brought by the accused Mandeep Singh. As per the statement Ex. PW3/E of the accused Mandeep Singh, the above vehicle belonged to one Joginder Singh, but he failed to give or provide the complete particulars of the above Joginder Singh and hence, Joginder Singh could not be traced out. However, some ownership enquiries were made from the concerned transport authority of Sheikh Sarai, New Delhi vide letter Ex. PW2/H issued by PW2 Sh B.K.Bannerjee and it was intimated vide endorsement made by an official of the concerned authority on the above letter Ex. PW2/H itself that the above vehicle was registered in the name of one Sh Muzzafar Shah, a resident of the given address of Pamposh Enclave, New Delhi. Even one witness Sh Om Prakash/PW18 has also been examined by the prosecution in this regard and he has brought on record a computerized copy of the ownership details/record of the said vehicle.

88. While claiming that the accused persons were picked up from her above residence on 07.05.2007 at around 9.30/10.00 AM by 4-5 persons in plain cloths, she had also stated in her examination in chief that the said officers had also taken the keys of the accused SC No. 71A/07 DRI Vs Gurudev Singh & Anr.

Mandeep Singh's red colour Safari vehicle with them. Thus, though she has not specifically admitted the seizure of the above Tata Safari vehicle from outside her house, but in a sense, she has stated on record that the above Tata Safari vehicle belongs to the accused Mandeep Singh. Hence, even the testimony of DW1 corroborates the case of the prosecution and the disclosures made by the accused persons in their above statements U/S 67 of the NDPS Act that the above Tata Safari vehicle, which was found parked outside the house of DW1 Smt Raj Kaur and the accused Gurudev Singh, belonged to and was parked there by the accused Mandeep Singh and the above evidence led by the prosecution on record regarding the above said two vehicles duly corroborates the disclosures made by the accused persons in their above statements regarding the use of the said vehicles in transporting the above contraband substance and the same is a strong ground for holding that the above statements and disclosures contained therein were made by the accused persons voluntarily and not under some force or duress etc.