Cr. Appeal No. 213 of 2015. Case: State of Himachal Pradesh Vs Nasib Singh. Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case NumberCr. Appeal No. 213 of 2015
Party NameState of Himachal Pradesh Vs Nasib Singh
CounselFor Appellant: Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Vikram Thakur, Deputy Advocate General and For Respondents: Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate vice Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Advocate
JudgesMr. Sanjay Karol and Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, JJ
IssueNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 20
Judgement DateApril 17, 2017
CourtHimachal Pradesh High Court

Judgment:

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge

  1. By way of this appeal, the appellant-State has challenged the judgment passed by the Court of learned Special Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra in Sessions case No. 35-1/X/13/2012, vide which learned trial Court has acquitted the respondent/accused for the commission of offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

  2. Case of the prosecution was that on 4.1.2012 at around 2:10 p.m. near Bhatia Stone Crusher, Damtal, police party was on patrolling duty, headed by PW-9 ASI Sarvjeet Singh. As per the prosecution, one Shri Raj Kumar met the police party at the place in issue and ASI Sarvjeet Singh started conversing with him. In the meantime, one person came from Dhangu side and when he saw the police party, he tried to run away. On suspicion, he was apprehended by the police and on inquiry, he disclosed his name as Nasib Singh, s/o Late Shri Padhi Ram. Accused was carrying a yellow coloured bag on his right shoulder. When the same was checked, it was found containing another bag, from which charas in the shape of sticks and balls, was recovered, which when weighed was found to be 1 kg 700 gms. Personal search of the accused led to the recovery of one intex mobile phone, one electronic weighing instrument and ` 170/-. Recovered substance was placed in a parcel of cloth, which was sealed with five seals of ''B'' impression. Mobile phone, electronic weighing machine and currency notes were placed in separate parcel of cloth and the parcel was sealed with five seals of ''B'' impression and both these parcels were taken into possession, vide memo, Ext. PW1/A and Ext. PW1/B, respectively. The specimen of seal was taken on a separate piece of cloth and the said seal was handed over to Shri Raj Kumar. Thereafter, NCB forms were filled in triplicate on the spot. Ruqua Ext. PW9/A was sent to the Police Station by the Investigating Officer through Constable Ashok Kumar, on the basis of which, FIR Ext. PW10/A was registered at Police Station, Indora. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer prepared special information report, Ext. PW8/A and sent the same to SDPO, Nurpur through HHC Naveen Kumar. He also prepared site plan of the place of recovery, Ext. PW9/B. Accused was thereafter arrested and the information of his arrest was given to his brother. Memo of personal search of accused, Ext. PW1/C was also prepared. Thereafter, accused along with the case property was produced before the SHO, who re-sealed the parcels with three seal impressions of ''R''. SHO handed over the case property to MHC. Special report under Section 57 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Ext. PW8/B was also prepared. Case property was entered in the Malkhana register of police station by PW- 11 Rakesh Kumar. Parcel of Charas was thereafter handed over to Constable Vinay Kumar, PW-7, who delivered the same to SFSL, Junga and report thereof Ext. PW9/J was received from SFSL, Junga. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

  3. After the completion of investigation, challan was filed in the Court, as prima-facie case was found against the accused. Accordingly, he was charged for the commission of offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

  4. Learned trial Court in its judgment held that the evidence brought on record by the prosecution was neither cogent nor satisfactory nor it pointed out towards the guilt of the accused. Learned trial Court held that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were full of improbabilities and discrepancies. It further held that the prosecution had miserably failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt that the accused on 4.1.2012 was found in exclusive and conscious possession of 1 Kg 700 grams of Charas at about 2:10 P.M. near Bhatia Stone...

To continue reading

Request your trial