9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces Act, 1985, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- with the default sentence of nine months rigorous imprisonment by judgment and order dated May 27, 1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala (Special Court constituted under the NDPS Act) in Sessions Case No.26 of 12.9.1997 (arising from FIR No.24 dated 17.5.1997). Against the judgment and order passed by the trial court, the appellant preferred an appeal (Criminal Appeal No.483-SB of 1998) before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The appeal too was, however, dismissed by judgment and order dated August 31, 2009 and the High Court upheld the trial court judgment without any modification in conviction or sentence. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. The statement made by the appellant was reduced to writing, following which the police party went to his residence where three bags, each containing 40 kgs. of poppy husk, were recovered from the room used for storing hay. The search and recovery was made in presence of two witnesses, one Baldev Singh, Sub Inspector, and the other the Sarpanch of the village and the seizure memo was attested by the Superintendent of Police. In support of its case the prosecution examined six witnesses, including Inspector Rachhpal Singh, who led the police party and at whose instance the recoveries are said to have been made. Inspector Rachhpal Singh was examined as PW-5 and in his deposition before the Court he stated as follows:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de a statement in which he disclosed the fact that he had hidden three bags of poppy husk in a room at his residence a fact that was till then unknown to anyone, including the police party. In other words, the accused seems to have invited and led the police to the narcotic substances that lay hidden in a room at his residence. In this case, we do not propose to go into the legal question concerning the admissibility of the disclosure statement made by the appellant under section 27 of the Evidence Act. According to the prosecution case itself, no incriminating article was recovered prior to the statement made by the appellant and whether or not at that point of time he could be considered as an accused and the statement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
