Case under section 18 of the NDPS act cannot be disposed on the ground that chain of evidence was incomplete

Yugashree | School of Law Sastra University, Thanjavur | 7th April 2020

Surinder Kumar vs. State of Punjab

Facts:

• The appellant accused of an offense punishable under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the judgment of the Special Judge, Ferozepur and sentenced to 10 years in prison and a fine of Rs. 1.000.000/-in default of payment of the same, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years.
• The police saw the appellant possessing a bag in his hand and in suspicion the police went in search of the alleged bag which resulted in recovery of opium and the police officials upon seizure sent 2 samples for test resulting in confirming the alleged goods.
• After filing of FIR and completion of Investigation the appellant was produced before the court  and a charge against section 18 of NDPS act is made against him which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
• Prosecution produced 4 witnesses to prove the appellant to be guilty and all of the available evidences were against the appellant. Though he pleaded it to be false evidence nothing was available to prove his plea. The trial court awarded the aforesaid punishment to the appellant.
• The appellant being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgement filed a criminal appeal before High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh which the court dismissed and confirmed the judgement and issued order of sentence.

Hon’ble SC’s Observation:

• There is a violation of provision under Section 50 of NDPS Act, 1985.
• Only because the prosecutor did not examine any independent witness, the same does not automatically lead to the conclusion that the defendant was wrongly involved.
• Contention of the appellant: link evidence was incomplete but court’s finding: chain of evidence was complete
• Non-examination of ASP in whose presence the search was made which is fatal to the case of prosecution and it is in violation of Section 50 of NDPS Act, 1985. The perusal of the record reveals the ASP was summoned number of times but either service was not effected or as and when he was served, he sent a request for exemption from personal attendance stating valid reasons.

Decision:

Court cancelled the bail of appeal and ordered him to surrender within four weeks from the date of Judgement to serve the remaining period of sentence.