TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 920X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant was considered by this Court and vide its judgment dated 13th December 2000, this Court came to conclusion that NCB was not an authority empowered to perform functions under Sections 41, 42, 53 or 67 of the Act and or to do investigation, recovery or proceedings under the Act. The appellant was, therefore, acquitted without going into the other aspects of the case raised by the appellant. An appeal was preferred by NCB against the order of this Court before the Supreme Court and vide its judgment dated 11th February 2003 in NCB v. Kulwant Singh being Criminal Appeal No. 1139 of 2000, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment rendered by this Court and held that NCB was a Wing/Branch of the Department of Revenue of Government of India and it had authority to act under Section 41, 42 and other provisions of the Act. The Act authorizes the Central Government to empower NCB officers to exercise powers under the various provisions of the Act. By so empowering the officials, the Central Government purports to effectively perform the obligation cast upon it by law. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of NCB and set aside the judgment of this Court dated 13th December 2000 and remi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g proceedings were conducted inside the Gurudwara. The brownish powder was weighed, it was found to weigh 980 gm. Out of this two samples of 5 gm each were drawn and separately sealed and the remaining powder was sealed separately. The paper slips, duly signed by panch witnesses and team members, were affixed on the samples as well as on the remaining quantity. The panchnama Ex.PW1/A was prepared and was signed by the panch witnesses and team members. Since the appellant had received injuries, he was taken to RML Hospital by the Investigating Officer Manoj Sharma and seized property was taken to NCB Office. The sealed samples were handed over to Mr. Surender Sharma and the sealed case property was deposited with Malkhana on the same very day. 5. The statement of appellant under Section 67 of the Act was recorded by NCB Officials after he was discharged from the hospital wherein he confessed his guilt. A report under Section 57 of the Act Ex.PW4/H was sent to Zonal Director on the same day. 6. Complaint Ex.PW4/A was filed by the NCB against the appellant after completion of investigation, and receipt of report from Forensic Laboratory. 7. Learned trial court after consideri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d court and on his request he was again sent to RML Hospital for his medical examination. It is submitted that the appellant was falsely implicated in the case. Prosecution has failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt and appellant deserves to be acquitted. 9. There is no denial of the fact that the panch witnesses viz PW1 and PW2 have turned hostile and have not supported the case of the prosecution. Both these witnesses, however, have admitted during their cross examination that they had signed the Panchnama Ex.PW1/A, signed the paper slips tied on the four sides of cardboard box containing remaining part of drug, after taking sample. They also admitted their signatures on the paper slip Ex.P2 pasted on the envelop Ex.A2 on four corners, sealed with the seal of NCB. Both the witnesses admitted that statement Ex.PW1/B and PW2/A were given by them to the NCB officials in their own handwriting on 9th July 1996. Both admitted that they had received summons for appearing before NCB for giving statements on 8th July 1996. Their stand, however, was that they were given written text of a statement which they copied on the paper and signed it and then gave it to the NCB. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the instant case, the statements made by the witnesses in their handwriting, signing by the witnesses on Panchnama, paper slips, sealing material and other documents, all have been proved. Their presence at the relevant time at the spot was also proved. I consider that the learned trial court rightly believed the version of the complainant that the public witnesses were joined at the time of investigation and the recovery was made in their presence and that is the only reason they signed the documents of recovery being effected in their presence and Panchnama and the paper slips etc. 14. The recovery of the heroin from appellant has been proved otherwise also by PW4 and PW5, who were the members of the raiding party and had apprehended the appellant after a long chase. There is no reason to disbelieve the testimony of PW4 and PW5 only because they are police personnel. Both these witnesses have been cross examined at length. They have testified to the case of the complainant i.e. NCB about the information having been received regarding appellant's coming near Army Public School, Daula Kuan for delivery of consignment to Ajit Singh, an accused who was apprehended in anothe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ehended after a chase and recovery of narcotic substance weighing 980 gm (Heroin) was recovered from him. 18. The arguments of the appellant that there was non compliance of Section 50 of the Act must fail. It is settled law that Section 50 of the Act is applicable only in those cases where the contraband is found on the person i.e. body of the accused. Where a contraband is recovered from the place, other than the body of the of the accused, Section 50 is not attracted. Where there is recovery from the house, from the car, motorcycle or from the bag held by the accused, Section 50 would not be applicable. Reference can be made to Union of India and Ors. v. L.D. Balam Singh and Saikou Jabbi v. State of Maharashtra . 19. In the present case, recovery of heroin was made from the glove compartment of the car of the appellant. I, therefore, consider that Section 50 of the Act would not be applicable in this case. 20. The other provisions of NDPS Act have also been squarely complied with in this case. The information received from Ajit Singh an accused in another case was recorded by the Investigating Officer of that case and immediately forwarded to his senior officers whereby ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
