Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

BRIEF FACTS 1.1 The accused Puran Jai Thapa @ Naveen has been sent to face trial for committing an offence punishable under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'NDPS Act').

1.2. The facts of the case in brief as per the charge sheet filed by the prosecution are that the FIR in question was registered on 05.02.2019. The secret information was received on 04.02.2019 at about 09:30 PM by ASI ram SC No. 222/2019, FIR No. 26/2019 State Vs. Puran Jai Thapa @ Naveen Page No. 1 of 22 PS Crime Branch Niwas through secret informer and it was concerning one person by the name of Puran Jai Thapa r/o Nepal aged about 52 years, carrying Charas, would come Opposite Veer Apartment, Sector-13, Rohini, Japanese Park Side Service Road at about 10:30-11:30 PM to sell the contraband and if raided, he could be apprehended. ASI Ram Niwas verified the said information and shared the information with Inspector Mukesh Antil by producing the informer before him. Thereafter, SHO satisfied himself after verifying the secret information and shared the information with ACP and as per instructions, ASI Ram Niwas was directed to prepared a raiding party. Accordingly, ASI Ram Niwas recorded the said information vide DD no. 36 dated 04.02.2019 in this regard. On the directions of the SHO, one raiding party comprising of ASI Ram Niwas, HC Parveen Dahiya, HC Parveen Kumar and Ct. Arun Kumar was constituted. They left the PS alongwith the secret informer in a private vehicle bearing No. DL8CAN8443 alongwith IO kit bag, laptop, printer, Field Testing Kit and Electronic Weighing Machine.

4.3 He further deposed that ASI Ram Niwas constituted a raiding party including him, HC Parveen Dahiya, Ct. Arun Kumar and ASI Ram Niwas himself and all the members were briefed about the secret information. He further deposed that thereafter at about 10:10 PM, they left the office in private car bearing No. DL8CAN 8443 alongwith informer. He further deposed that while leaving the office, ASI Ram Niwas had taken laptop, printer, IO bag, field testing kit and electronic weighing scale with him. 4.4 He further deposed that at about 10:30 PM, they reached opposite Veer Apartment, Sector-13, Rohini towards Japanese Park on the Service Road where ASI Ram Niwas requested 2-3 passersby to join the raiding party but none agreed and due to paucity of time, notice was not served upon them. He further deposed that thereafter, ASI Ram Niwas deputed the members of the raiding party around the corner of Japanese Park. At about 11:00 PM, accused was seen coming from Prashant Vihar side and he was having a red and black colour bag on his right shoulder. He halted in front of Veer Apartment towards Japanese Park corner side. The informer pointed out towards the accused and left the spot.

4.8 He further deposed that at about 02:30 PM, SI Parveen Atri reached at the spot as further investigation was marked to him. ASI Ram Niwas briefed SI Parveen Atri and handed over custody of accused and seizure memo and other documents to him.

4.9 He further deposed that at about 05:20 AM, HC Parveen Dahiya reached with the copy of FIR and thereafter, accused Puran Jai Thapa was arrested by SI Parveen Atri vide arrest memo which is Ex. PW1/B, conducted his personal search vide personal search memo which is Ex. PW1/C. During personal search of accused, notice under section 50 NDPS Act which is Ex. PW1/E, mobile phone and cash of Rs. 400/- were recovered. The copy of notice is Ex. PW1/D. 4.10 During cross examination done on behalf of accused, he stated that no separate inventory about the laptop, printer, IO kit bag, field testing kit, electronic weighing machine was made by the IO in his presence. He stated that neither he nor IO visited the guardroom of the Veer Apartment to ask the guard to join the investigation. He stated that accused was firstly apprehended by IO ASI Ram Niwas and thereafter, they all surrounded the accused. He stated that IO might have checked the phone of the accused but same was not done in his presence. He stated that he returned the seal to IO on the next date and no specific memo was prepared in this regard. He denied that nothing was recovered from the possession of accused and no notice under section 50 NDPS Act was ever served upon the accused. He denied that no handing over memo was prepared for the seal as no such seal was ever handed over to him.