State sought leave to appeal acquittal in NDPS case. High Court found trial court correctly noted contradictions in witness statements and gave benefit of doubt, declining leave to appeal.
Leave to appeal against acquittal was declined. Impugned judgment allowing acquittal was affirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRA-M No.210-MA of 2011 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRA-M No.210-MA of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.8.2012
State of Haryana
...Applicant
Versus
Smt.Sonia
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr.Rudraneel Bhardwaj, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana
Jitendra Chauhan, J. (Oral)
CRA-M No.210-MA of 2011 (O&M) 2
search of her bag, Ganja was recovered from it. Two samples of 100 grams each were separate from the bulk and converted into separate parcels. The remainder alongwith the polythene and plastic bag when were weighing it came out 7 Kgs. It was also converted into a parcel and sealed with seal “RS”. After use the specimen seal impression and seal were handed over to PW8 Om Parkash. Ruqa was sent to the police station for registration of the FIR. The sample parcels were sent to FSL Madhuban for chemical examination. Prepared the site plan and recorded the statements of the witnesses. After completion of the investigation, the respondent was charged under Section 20 of the Act as the contents of the parcel being Ganja. The accused did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
3
CRA-M No.210-MA of 2011 (O&M)
come forward to join the prosecution case.
“I may also mention that there are some discrepancies in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. Firstly PW2 Madan Lal has deposed that there were five police officials in the Govt. Jeep whereas PW7 Rattan Singh has deposed that the said police party consisted of 6-7 persons including the driver and PW8 Om Parkash has deposed that they were seven police officials. PW7 Rattan Singh has deposed that only one factory namely Gopi Chand Seeds Factory was near the place of recovery whereas PW8 Om Parkash has deposed that there were 5-7 factories near the said place. PW7 has deposed that there were some residential houses behind the factory whereas PW8 has deposed that there was no residential house near the place of recovery. PW7 Rattan Singh deposed that he alongwith PW8 Om Parkash and HC Tirlok Chand did the writing work at the spot whereas PW8 Om Parkash has deposed that some writing was done by PW-7 Rattan Singh and some by HC Tirlok Chand. The said variations in their respective depositions by the above stated prosecution witnesses, go to show that one of them has deposed falsely or one/ two of them was / were not present at the recovery place. Further PW7 and PW8 have deposed that some writing work was done in the light of the jeep. How it is so, has
4
CRA-M No.210-MA of 2011 (O&M)
not been explained.
learned trial Court by giving the benefit of doubt. The learned trial Court Court has rightly evaluated the evidence produced by the complainant and, the findings recorded do not suffer from any illegality, manifest error or perversity. The view taken by the learned trial Court is correct and even if other view is possible, this Court will hesitate to take another possible view. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the view taken by the learned trial Court, in the impugned judgment. No ground is made out to
grant leave to appeal. Declined.
21.8.2012 gsv
(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow leave to appeal against acquittal in an offence under the NDPS Act where the trial court noted contradictions in prosecution witness statements.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
State of Haryana
Sonia
Jitendra Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
