RAJIV KUMAR ALIAS GUGLU Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT is aggrieved by the judgment of the trial Court whereby he has been convicted of offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,00,000/-, in default of payment to fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two years.

(2.) APPELLANT was sent up for trial for an offence, under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, by the Police, on the following allegations. On 23.5.2003 when a Police Party, headed by PW-10 ASI Harbans Lal and comprising PW-2 HC Sarbjit Singh, PW-3 Constable Sanjiv Kumar and PW-5 HHC Sher Bahadur, as its other members, was present in village Laluwal in connection with routine patrolling, PW-1 Constable Suresh Kumar met it and informed PW-10 ASI Harbans Lal that he had secret information that the appellant had kept poppy straw in his house in village Bolewal and that if search was conducted, without loss of any time, huge quantity of the contraband could be recovered. That information was reduced into writing, in the form of statement of PW-1 Constable Suresh Kumar, by PW-10 ASI Harbans Lal for the formal registration of the case and also to meet the requirement of Section 42(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Thereafter, a raiding party was formed. PW-11 Ranjodh Singh and PW-4 Ashwani Kumar were associated as independent members of the party. The party went to the house of the appellant in village Bolewal. Appellant was present in the house. The room in which he was found was searched. Two gunny bags containing poppy straw were found. On weighment, one bag was found to contain 50.500 kgs. and the other 42.500 kgs. Two samples, each weighing 250 grams, were separated, from each of the two gunny bags and made into separate parcels. The samples were marked H-1 and H-2 and sealed with a seal that produced the impression of letter 'A' of English alphabet. One sample from each of the two bags was sent to the Chemical Examiner, who opined that both the samples contained contents of poppy husk.

(3.) MATTER was heard earlier by another Bench of which one of us (Surjit Singh, J.) was a Member and judgment was reserved. The said Division Bench while examining the record for the purpose of recording the judgment noticed that the Chemical Examiner conducted two tests, one for meconic acid and another for morphine, and found that the sample stuff tested positive for both the aforesaid things and on the basis of result of such tests gave the opinion that the sample stuff contained the contents of poppy husk. We felt that perhaps these two tests were not enough to come to the conclusion that the sample stuff was poppy husk or poppy straw, because the aforesaid tests were indicative of only this fact that the straw had traces of meconic acid and morphine. Therefore, the matter was released with the orders that the Chemical Examiner be summoned and examined as a Court witness. The matter was then listed before the present Bench. We recorded the statement of the Chemical Examiner on 3rd October, 2007, in the form of question-answers.