9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Appeal against acquittal under section 15 of the NDPS Act based on lack of evidence of conscious possession by the accused. Analysis: The case involved an appeal by the State of Punjab challenging the acquittal of two accused persons by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The accused were alleged to have committed an offence punishable under section 15 of the NDPS Act. The prosecution's case was based on the recovery of 100 bags of poppy husk from the accused. However, the High Court acquitted the accused, stating that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused were in conscious possession of the recovered poppy husk. The evidence primarily relied on the testimonies of two witnesses, PW-1 and PW-2, who found the accused sitting on the bags of poppy husk in a field in Village Lohgarh. The police did not investigate how the poppy husk was transported to the location or establish ownership of the bags. The High Court emphasized that mere presence at the site of recovery did not conclusively prove possession. The court noted that the prosecution did not fulfill its obligation to establish conscious possession by the accused. The High Court's decision was based on the lack of evidence supporting the accused's possession of the poppy husk. In the judgment, it was highlighted that the police should have conducted a more thorough investigation to establish the accused's conscious possession of the poppy husk. The failure to provide a satisfactory explanation for their presence at the location was not sufficient to prove possession. The Sessions Court did not adequately consider the accused's plea, leading to the High Court's decision to acquit the accused. Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's judgment, stating that there was no evidence to prove the accused's conscious possession of the recovered poppy husk. The prosecution's failure to discharge its burden of proof regarding possession led to the dismissal of the appeal by the State of Punjab.
|
