Dismissed

Ut of Chandigarh v. Bhajan Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Jul 2012CRM-A/173/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, in a leave to appeal against an acquittal in a drug case, dismissed the application. Upholding the Special Court's decision that the Investigating Officer failed to join independent witnesses and sample seals were tampered with, the Court found no merit in the appeal. The condonation of delay application was also dismissed consequentially.

What did the court decide?

Application for leave to appeal and application for condonation of delay dismissed.

Ut of Chandigarh Vs Bhajan Singh — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM No.173 MA of 2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM No.173 MA of 2011 Date of decision: 17.7.2012

¶5

Union Territory, Chandigarh

...Petitioner

Versus

Bhajan Singh

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

¶11

Present: Mr.Rakesh Nagpal, Advocate for the applicant

¶12

¶13

Jitendra Chauhan, J. (Oral)

¶14

The present application for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 26.8.2010, passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Chandigarh, whereby Bhajan Singh respondent was acquitted.

¶15

Learned counsel contends that the learned trial Court erred in acquitting the respondent whereas he was arrested on the spot. Opium of 550 grams was recovered from him. The learned trial Court acquitted him on the grounds that no effort was made to join any independent witness and there was tampering in the sample as the seal on the sample parcel was not found intact.

¶16

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the case file carefully.

¶17

The learned trial Court has categorically recorded that despite ample opportunity, no sincere effort was made by the Investigating Officer

¶18

CRM No.173 MA of 2011 2

¶19

to join any independent witness. Though the spot of recovery was a thoroughfare situated near the chowk of Hallo Majra, Chandigarh. Further, the as per the report of CFSL, the seal on the sample parcel was not found intact and the weighed of sample parcel was also 23.56 grams, whereas two samples of 25 grams each were taken out from the recovered opium. Therefore, the learned trial Court has rightly doubted the prosecution version and dismissed it.

¶20

In view of the above, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the well reasoned judgment passed by the learned trial Court. As such, the present application for leave to appeal is dismissed being bereft of any merit.

¶21

As the main application has since been dismissed, therefore, there is no merit in the application for condonation of delay in filing the application for leave to appeal. Hence, the same is also dismissed.

¶22

(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE

¶23

18.7.2012 gsv

Ut of Chandigarh v. Bhajan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ut of Chandigarh v. Bhajan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Krishan K. Mittal and Comapny Vs M/S Ludhiana Moulding Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Des Raj Vs State of Punjab etc.

Anju Bala Vs Bikramjit Singh and Ors.

Sarabjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Kuldip Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Tariklon etc. Vs State of Punjab