Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2016 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 1742 - HC - Indian LawsSmuggling - Heroin - Acquittal of Offences - the case of the prosecution is based upon depositions of official witnesses only with no independent witness coming forward to support the prosecution story. Therefore, the prosecution case is rendered doubtful and giving benefit of doubt to the accused, they should be acquitted of the charges framed against them - Held that:- Though the case of prosecution is based upon deposition of official witnesses but since no previous enmity is alleged or proved between the accused and such official witnesses, their testimonies cannot be discarded for such reason. It needs to be mentioned here that at the time of recovery two independent witnesses, namely, Shri Parteek Kapoor and Shri Balbir Ram had been associated but they were not examined by the prosecution during the trial. It needs to be mentioned here that the prosecution is not required to examine each and every witness cited by it in the list of witnesses and non-examining of independent witness does not affect the case of the prosecution adversely. Therefore, the statements of official witnesses in the absence of independent corroboration can certainly be relied upon. The prosecution has successfully proved its charge against the accused conclusively and affirmatively by leading sufficient cogent, convincing, reliable, ocular and documentary evidence, therefore, there is no question of accused being involved in this ease falsely. In the instant case though Section 50 of the NDPS Act is not applicable, since recovery was not effected from personal search of accused but even then the officers of DRI had served both the accused with notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act and the accused had given their option that their personal search and search of the car might be conducted in the presence of Gazetted Officer. Shri SJS Chugh, being Gazetted Officer was there and search of both the accused and that of the car was conducted in his presence. Therefore, there was no violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act in this case. The accused-convicts can be granted certain concession in that regard, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and considering that no previous conviction is alleged or proved against the accused, they are stated to be only earning member of their family and they are behind the bars for several years - appeal disposed off.
|