his seal SS and later on, deposit the same with the Malkhana. In cross-examination, he denied of tampering with the case property and he also denied that SHO Vijay Kumar had returned back. He admitted that SHO was Vijay Kumar, but who was not present as such. the case property was received by him and he had forwarded the same. The case property was taken to the laboratory by PW 2 constable Dharmpal Pal. He tendered his affidavit in evidence as Exhibit P6. In cross-examination, he admitted that the sample was bearing seal impressions of RKM and VK, when the sample was given to him. PW4-ASI Ramesh Kumar, who was the investigator, was also cross-examined and he stated that the SHO was Surat Singh, who had affixed his seal SS on all the samples. In cross-examination, he admitted that seal monograms have been converted from VK to SS. But he denied that he had interpolated the seals from SS to VK. Inspector Vijay Kumar was examined as PW7, who admitted that earlier seal was mentioned as VK and later on it was substituted with the word SS. He said that he had initialed the cutting but he did not mentioned that how this contradiction had happened. The material contradiction in the prosecution case is that the re-seal of the case property had to be by SS i.e. PW1, who was officiating SHO, and he had stated an oath that he had re-sealed the case property and since his name is Surat Singh, his seal was SS. But PW7 Vijay Kumar who was actual SHO, had not sealed, then there was no question of the seal's impressions bearing seal VK, which again represents his name. The FSL report has been tendered in evidence as Exhibit P13 and it describes the seals on the parcel as RKM and SS. Thus, a fundamental contradiction has come that initially, it was the reason and occasion to re-seal the case property as VK. It appears that resealing was an empty formality, and the police party had used the seal of the SHO VK, but they did not realise that since VK was not present in the police station, then they exchanged it with SS, who was officiating as SHO. It means the entire exercise of resealing was done by the investigator or other police officers without even taking into confidence the SHO. Later on PW7 Vijay Kumar is trying to justify by saying that he had initialed the same, but he could not explain that under what circumstances, his personal seal of VK got into the possession of the police officers and how it was affixed without his permission and in his absence. It shows that the entire re-sealing was a farce, never actually done, and was a cover-up by the police. Thus, on this ground alone, the link evidence is ANJU RANI 2026.03.17 16:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this documentPunjab and Haryana High Court missing and the prosecution has failed to connect the recovered opium with what was sent Chandigarh
