9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 42 of the Act has no applicability to the instant case. Therefore, the secret information was neither required to be reduced in writing nor it was required to be sent to immediate official superior.Thus contention of counsel for the appellant based on non-compliance with Section 42 cannot be accepted. The appellant cannot also be acquitted merely because no independent witness was joined as there has been recovery of very huge quantity of heroine from the appellant. Prosecution version has been deposed to by Nachhattar Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police who was SHO at the relevant time and also by two Inspectors of Customs. The said witnesses had no enmity whatsoever with the accused-appellant so as to implicate him in a false cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tar Singh, Station House Officer of Police Station Jalalabad was having secret information that the accused was indulging in smuggling activities. Accordingly, joint party of police officials and customs officials held nakabandi. At about 12.30am on the night intervening 27/28.02.1989, the accused was seen coming with a bag on his shoulder. The accused on seeing the naka party tried to slip away. However, he was overpowered. On search, five packets containing heroine weighing 4 kilograms 865 grams in all was recovered, besides a country made pistol, three live cartridges and two tablets. Samples were drawn from the packets of heroine. The samples and the remaining heroine were sealed in separate parcels and the same were seized by officials ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ued that although there was secret information with the police, the same was not reduced into writing nor sent to immediate official superior and, therefore, there has been total non-compliance with Section 42 of the Act entitling the appellant to acquittal. It was also argued that no independent witness was joined although nakabandi was held on the basis of secret information. Lastly, it was argued that the appellant has been acquitted in the case under the Arms Act relating to alleged recovery of pistol and cartridges at the same time. I have carefully considered the aforesaid contentions but the same cannot be accepted. Section 42 of the Act empowers officers of Police, Customs etc. to conduct search of any building, conveyance or encl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have deposed about recovery of the heroine from the appellant had no reason to depose falsely against the appellant. They were not hostile or inimical to the appellant in any manner. Consequently their statements are as much credible as those of so called independent or non-official witnesses. Statements of these three witnesses cannot be discarded merely because of their official status. In the aforesaid context, it is also significant to notice that the appellant also made statement before Customs Inspector, admitting the recovery of the heroine from him. The said statement further corroborates the prosecution case. However, even independently and irrespective of the said statement also, the prosecution evidence is sufficient to bring ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
