BHAG CHAND Vs. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.3.2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu whereby the deceased appellant Gupt Ram and other appellants (hereafter referred to as the accused persons) have been convicted under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereafter referred to as the NDPS Act) and each one of them has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000 and in default of payment of fine to suffer further imprisonment for one year each.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution against the accused persons is that Rakesh Goyal (PW -1), Zonal Director, of the Narcotics Control Bureau (hereafter referred to as "N.C.B.") Chandigarh, alongwith other officials of the N.C.B., namely, R.P. Singh, O.P. Bhatt (PW -8), Malkiat Singh (PW -4) and two sepoys came to Kullu on 10.10.1999. On 12.10.1999 PW -8 gave him the information vide Ext. PW -1/A that Gupt Ram, Ranjit Lal and his family were dealing in contraband. On receipt of this information, PW -1 issued authorisation Ext. PW -1/B authorizing PW -8 to search the premises of the accused persons and a team consisting of PW -8, R.P. Singh, Malkiat Singh (PW -4), Paramjeet and Rajesh Kumar was deputed to carry out the search of the house occupied by accused persons in village Naraini. Two independent witnesses, namely, K.N. Bhardwaj (PW -5) and Amar Nath were joined in the search party besides some local police officials, including a lady constable. PW -1 also accompanied the search party which proceeded to the residential house in question. On knocking the door of one of the rooms of the house accused Gupt Ram came out of the room and he was informed by PW -8 that as per the information some narcotic material was lying in the house and a search of the house was intended by the search party. Accused Gupt Ram informed that nothing was lying in the house and search could be taken. After deputing one person there the door of the adjacent room was knocked which was opened by accused Laxmi Devi, who was followed by accused Ranjit Lal. They were also informed of the intended search. The notices Exts. PW -5/A and PW -5/B under Section 50 of the NDPS Act were served on accused Gupt Ram and Ranjit Lal and they agreed for search by any of the officer of the search party. After observing the legal formalities, the room, which was opened by accused Gupt Ram, was searched and 10 kgs. of Charas wrapped in a plastic bag kept concealed under the guilt/Gaddi and other clothes was found in a corner of the room. On search of the other room in the possession of accused Ranjit Lal and Laxmi Devi 5 Kgs. of Charas kept in a plastic bag in the Diwaan/bed was recovered. The Charas so recovered was made into three parcels of 5 kgs. each and two samples of 25 grams each were taken from each packet which were marked X -l, X -2, Y -l, Y -2, Z -l and Z -2. The samples were sealed in accordance with the procedure and the parcels of bulk Charas marked X, Y and Z were also sealed with the seal of the NCB provided by PW -1. The packets were got signed from the accused persons which were so prepared that those could not be opened without breaking the seals. About the search and recovery Panchnama Ext. PW -5/C was prepared. Out of the said samples, samples marked X -l, Y -l and Z -l were sent to the CRCL Pusa Road New Delhi for analysis vide Ext. PW -1/D alongwith test memos. The remaining samples and bulk Charas were deposited in the custom Malkhana, Chandigarh against receipt Ext. PW -1/K. The information under Section 57 was submitted by PW -8 to PW -1 vide Ext. PW -1/L. Statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act which are Exts. PW -5/C, PW -5/E and PW -5/E The accused persons were arrested vide Memos Ext. PW -5/H, PW -5/K and PW -5/L. On analysis the samples sent to the Laboratory were found those of Charas vide report Ext. PW -1/J. Consequently, a complaint was lodged by the NCB against the accused persons in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu. The accused persons were tried on a charge under Section 20 of the NDPS Act. To prove the charge against them, the prosecution examined eight witnesses. Statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein they denied the case of the prosecution and claimed to be innocent. The accused persons, however, did not lead any defence evidence.

(3.) IT may be pointed out here that during the pendency of the appeal accused/appellant Gupt Ram died and because of the fiscal interest involved his son Bhag Chand was substituted in his place, as envisaged under Section 394 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.