K.M. Joseph JUDGMENT
U.U. Lalit, J.
1. This appeal challenges the judgment and final order dated 03.03.2020 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh dismissing CR A-S-1759-SB-2004 preferred by the Appellants and affirming their conviction and sentence Under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ("the NDPS Act" for short).
2. The basic facts and the case of prosecution as recorded by the High Court in its judgment are as under:
2. The facts as put forth by the prosecution are to the effect that on 28.01.2002, S.I. Nand Lal alongwith fellow police officials were present at the canal bridge on Surtia-Rori road, where he received a secret information to the effect that the Accused are selling poppy straw in a vehicle bearing registration number GUD-4997 on a 'kacha path' at Rori-Jatana road and they can be apprehended if raid is conducted. Accordingly, a raid was conducted and the Accused were found sitting in the jeep bearing registration number GUD-4997 at the aforesaid place. Major Singh, co-Accused of the Appellants, managed to slip away, whereas, the Appellants were apprehend at the spot. They were found sitting upon two bags kept in the said jeep. Notices Under Section 50 of the Act were served upon them but the Appellants reposed faith upon the police officials. The search of the bags led to the recovery of poppy straw. One bag was containing 39 kg of poppy straw and the second bag was containing 36 kg of poppy straw. Two samples weighing 100 grams each were separated from each bag. The sample parcels and the bulk parcels were converted into separate parcels and sealed with the seal bearing impression 'CS'. The jeep alongwith weighing scale, two weights of 500 grams each were also recovered and taken into possession vide recovery memos. Ruqa was recorded and dispatched to the police station on the basis thereof, the FIR was registered. Subsequently, Major Singh, co-Accused, was arrested. and on completion of investigation, the challan was presented in the Court.
3. The charge was framed. The contents thereof were read over and explained to the Appellants, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In support of its allegations, the prosecution has examined four witnesses. Inspector Nand Lal (PW4) has conducted the search of the Accused in the presence of ASI Jaswant Singh (PW3). The case property was retained in the malkhana by Kuldeep Singh (PW2) and Constable Gurjit Singh (PW 1) took the sample parcels to the FSL. The prosecution has also 2 of 10 produced documentary evidence to substantiate the version as put forth by it.
3. By order dated 15.03.2002, on an application preferred by him, the vehicle in question was released by the Trial Court in favour of Accused Gurdeep Singh.
4. During trial, PW4 Inspector Nand Lal, the Investigating Officer deposed in his examination-in-chief as under:
On 28.1.2002 I was posted as Sub Inspector/SHO in Police Station Rori. On that day, I alongwith ASI Jaswant Singh and other police officials were present at the canal bridge on ........