9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1742X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by Surinder Kumar Khanna accused, all of them having been convicted and sentenced by the Judge, Special Court, Hoshiarpur, vide judgment dated 24-4-2013 as follows :- Name of Convict Offence under Section(s) Sentence Awarded Raj Kumar @ Raju 21(c) of the NDPS Act To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 12 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lac. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. Surinder Pal Singh 21(c) of the NDPS Act To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 12 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lac. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. Surinder Kumar Khanna 21(c) read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act To undergo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the presence of independent witnesses and Shri SJS Chugh, Senior Intelligence Officer. Personal searches of the accused did not result into recovery of any incriminating material. However, when their Indica car was searched and its rear boot was opened, four packets wrapped with yellowish adhesive tapes were found concealed in the door of rear boot (dickey of the car). The gross weight of those four packets came out to 4.300 kg. All the four packets were then cut open one by one. Each of the packet was containing white colour grannules/powder which gave a very pungent smell. The pinch of each of the packet was tested, which showed the presence of heroin. The recovered heroin weighing 3.990 kgs was valued at Rs. 19,95,000/-. Those four ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as regards officers of DRI intercepting Indica car bearing registration No. PB-02AJ-7288 on 24-4-2008, the said car being driven by Raj Kumar accused and Surinder Pal Singh sitting on the front seat; the search of car being done, resulting in recovery of heroin weighing 3.990 kg; drawing of two representative samples of 5 gms each; and preparation of various memos and documents showing arrest of both the accused in this case. He deposed that as a follow up action, he issued summons to Surinder Kumar Khanna to appear before him but he did not appear. Ultimately, his production warrants were obtained from the Court and then his statement was recorded. 6. PW2 Rajesh Sarswat, who on 28-4-2008, was posted as Inspector, Customs House, Amri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted upon them; that 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. 12. On the other hand, learned State counsel and learned counsel for the DR1 have submitted that the official witnesses had no previous enmity with the accused prompted by which they might have treaded on the dangerous path of false implication, risking their services and career. Therefore, there is no question of accused being involved in this case falsely. Furthermore, keeping in view the fact that reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... volved in this ease falsely. 14. Another argument put forward by learned counsel for the appellants-accused was that the mandatory provisions of the Act were violated while arresting the accused and effecting recovery from them, rendering the recovery to be doubtful. However, learned counsel for the appellants could not pin-point any specific provisions of the Act which might have been violated/flouted by the officers of the DRI while apprehending accused Raj Kumar @ Raju and Surinder Pal Singh and effecting recovery from them as well as while arresting Surinder Kumar Khanna. 15. 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not come within the definition of police officers. Though counsel for the appellants-accused has submitted that Section 42 of the NDPS Act was not complied with but in the absence of the accused showing any prejudice having been caused to them, such non-compliance does not vitiate the trial. 17. The judgment passed by the trial Court is well reasoned one based upon proper appraisal, appreciation of evidence and correct interpretation of law. We do not find any illegality and infirmity with the said judgment as regards the conviction part, therefore, conviction of all the appellants-accused is maintained. However, as far as sentence part is concerned, we are of the view that the accused-convicts can be granted certain concession in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
