TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (2) TMI 826
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh being Criminal Appeal No.655-SB/1997. The High Court by its impugned judgment and order of 19th February, 1999 allowed the appeal and set aside the order of conviction and sentence passed against the respondent. The State of Punjab has come up in appeal before this Court by special leave. The facts of the case are that ASI Sampuran Singh (PW3) along with ASI Surinder Paul Singh (PW1) and Head Constable Satnam Singh, Constable Harinder Singh and other police officials was on patrol duty. While they were at village Ahankheri, Sampuran Singh PW3 received a secret information that the respondent was selling poppyhusk in wholesale and that on the preceding night in village Farid Pur Kalan several ba....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... chemical examiner was produced before the court marked Exh.PH. The incriminating circumstances were put to the accused in his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. There was a general denial by the respondent of all the incriminating circumstances put to him but in answer to the last question, the respondent stated that the police party was inimical towards him and he had, therefore, been falsely implicated. According to him in the year 1987 he had advanced a sum of Rs. 18,000/- to Dhan Singh and Hakam Singh. The said Dhan Singh and Hakam Singh refused to repay the amount on demand. In the year 1990 ASI Amar Singh, ASI Sampuran Singh,PW3 and sub-inspector Shamsher Singh brought him (the respondent) to the police ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that in view of the fact that the search was made pursuant to secret information received by the investigating officer, Section 42 read with Section 50 obliged the prosecution to give an option to the respondent to be searched before a magistrate or a gazetted officer. Since that was not done, the mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S Act were breached and the respondent was entitled to an acquittal. The High Court held that the use of the word "person" in Section 50 has to be given its widest import otherwise the provision will be rendered nugatory. As an illustration the High Court observed that if a person was found carrying a bag in his hand containing narcotic substance, before the bag is searched, the requirements of Sect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng on them. On search of the respondent, nothing incriminating was found and only a sum of Rs. 200/- was recovered, but on search of the bags it was found to contain poppyhusk. The question is whether in the facts and circumstance of this case, search of the bags would amount to search of the person of the respondent. In our view this is clearly not a case of personal search and, therefore, requirements of Section 50 will not be attracted. The High Court was clearly in error in holding that the provisions of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S Act apply to a case with such facts. Learned amicus curiae appearing on behalf of the respondent sought to sustain the order of acquittal by reference to other evidence on record. He submitted that the police w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d from the facts of this case, it does not appear to be a case of implanted evidence. The police had prior information of the fact that poppyhusk contained in several bags had been unloaded at the point where they were ultimately found. Intimation of this fact had been given to the Superintendent of Police who reached the place where the bags were unloaded. The respondent was found present there. The quantity is so large that the question of implanting does not arise. No other explanation has been offered by the respondent. Given these facts and circumstance, we are of the view that the defence of the respondent, that he was falsely implicated, cannot be accepted. In view of these findings, we allow this appeal, set aside the impugned jud....