Bagga Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No.S-3101-SB of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 29, 2017 Bagga Singh ...Appellant

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.L.S.Sekhon, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr.Ajay Pal Singh Gill, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against State of Punjab, challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.08.2017 passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Sangrur, whereby the appellant was held guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five months and to pay fine of `8,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months under Section 15 of the NDPS Act.

The brief facts of the prosecution case as noted down in the judgment passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Sangrur, are as under:- "2. Prosecution story is to the effect that on 28.05.2014, ASI

-2Amarjit Singh No.312/Sangrur (hereinafter to be referred to as Investigating Officer/I.O.), along with HC Mukhtiar Singh 2145 No. (hereinafter to be referred to as recovery witness), HC Karnail Singh No. 2200 and C. Pardeep Singh No. 467 were present in the area of Check Post, Rampura Village Ganota in the course of patrol duty in a private vehicle. At about 7:30 A.M, a motor cycle baring No.PB-11AS-7406 Mark Hero Honda Splendor came from Tohana side, upon which two persons were traveling. On seeing the police party, the person who was driving the motor cycle stopped his motor cycle at some distance away from the police party and he ran away from the spot. ASI Amarjit Singh getting suspicious apprehended the pillion rider of motor cycle, who was holding a plastic thela (plastic bag).

Upon inquiry, he disclosed himself to be Bagga Singh son of Gareeb Dass, resident of Ward No.04, Moonak. On being asked, Bagga Singh disclosed that the person who ran away from the spot is his son Charanjit Singh @ Phullu. ASI also disclosed his name, identity and designation to the accused and informed him that he suspected him to be carrying some contraband Narcotic substance and thus, wanted to search him. He also apprised him regarding his statutory right to be searched by some Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate,who can even be called at the spot. Since accused reposed confidence in the ASI, his consent memo Ex.PC was prepared, which was thumb marked by the accused and witnessed by HC Mukhtiar Singh and HC Karnail Singh. On search of thela plastic bag carried by the accused on motor cycle, poppy husk was recovered therefrom.

On asking, accused failed to produce any permit, licence and also failed to give satisfactory reply for possessing the same. Two samples of 250 gram of poppy husk each, were separated out and remaining came out to be 14 Kgs 500 grams of poppy husk. Samples and the bulk were converted into parcels and sealed by the I.O. with his seal of GS. The sample seals were separately prepared, one of which is Ex.P1. Form No.29 was prepared as Ex.P2. Seal after use was handed over to HC Mukhtiar Singh. The recovered contraband including sample seal, chit were taken into police possession vide recovery memo Ex.PD, which came to be attested by HC Mukhtiar Singh and HC Karnail Singh. Ruqa Ex.PE was sent to the police station through C. Pardeep Singh, on the basis whereof FIR Ex.PE/1 came to be registered by ASI Randeep Singh.

Recovered motor cycle bearing No.PB-11AS-7406 was also taken into police possession vide memo Ex.PF. From the personal search of accused, nothing was recovered Personal search memo Ex.PG was prepared. Accused having been arrested, his arrest/information memo Ex.PH was prepared. Information with regard to arrest of accused was given to Kala Singh M.C., on his mobile No. 95013-46981. Site plan of the place of recovery Ex.PJ was prepared. Special report Ex.PK was prepared. ASI recorded the statements of witnesses."

-3On presentation of challan against accused-appellant, copies of challan and other documents were supplied to him under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Finding prima facie case, the accused-appellant was charge-sheeted under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

In support of its case, prosecution examined PW-1 Constable Pardeep Singh, PW-2 ASI Ajaib Singh, PW-3 ASI Amarjit Singh, PW-4 Dharamvir, Junior Assistant, PW-5 Head Constable Mukhtiar Singh, PW-6 SI Baljit Singh.

At the close of prosecution evidence, the accused-appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He was confronted with the evidence of the prosecution and he denied the correctness of the evidence and pleaded himself as innocent and his false implication in the present case. No witness was examined in defence.

The learned trial Court, after appreciation of the evidence, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as stated above. At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant did not dispute the findings regarding conviction and only prayed for reduction of sentence of the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that poppy husk weighing 15 kgs. has been recovered from the accusedappellant, which falls under non-commercial category. He also contended that the appellant is poor person, sole bread earner of the family and is suffering from criminal proceedings since 2014. Learned counsel for the appellant next contended that appellant has already undergone 2 months 15 days of actual sentence.

-4On the other hand, learned State counsel argued that case of the prosecution has been duly proved by the PWs. There is nothing on the record to show false implication of the accused in the present case. He next argued that PWs have consistently deposed regarding the recovery from the accused. Learned State counsel, therefore, argued that there being no merit, the present appeal should be dismissed.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. In view of the evidence, I find that the prosecution has duly proved its case by leading cogent evidence beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the judgment of conviction dated 24.08.2017 passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Sangrur, is correct, as per law and does not require any interference from this Court.

However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the fact that appellant is stated to be poor person, sole bread earner of the family and suffering from long protracted criminal proceedings since 2014 i.e. for the last about 3 years and further in view of the fact that appellant has already undergone actual sentence of 2 months and 15 days and keeping in view the fact the recovery from the accused-appellant falls under non-commercial category i.e. 15 kgs. poppy husk, the sentence imposed upon the appellant is reduced to the sentence already undergone by him. The sentence of fine is also reduced and he is directed to pay fine of `4000/- instead of `8000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Accordingly, present criminal appeal stands partly allowed. Appellant Bagga Singh, who is in custody, be set at liberty

-5forthwith, if his custody is not required in connection with any other case, subject to payment of fine.

September 29, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No