IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. M.P(M) No. 482 of 2009 Date of decision: 22.6.2009 State of H.P. ... Appellant Versus Dilmi Ram … Respondent Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the appellant: Mr.Rajesh Mandhotra, Deputy Advocate General. For the respondent: None ____________________________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J (Oral). This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Special Judge, Shimla dated 15.1.2009 delivered in Sessions Trial No.03-S/7 of 2008 whereby he acquitted the accused of having committed an offence punishable under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on the night intervening 12th and 13th June, 2007, PW-10 SI Govind Ram, Station House Officer, Police Station, Chopal along with ASI Gulam Akbar and constables Ratti Ram and Surat Singh, PWs 1&6, went from Police Station Chopal towards Maudog Pujarli and Khidki for patrolling duty. They set out to identify places where ‘Bhang’ had been cultivated. On 13.6.2007 at about 11.30 a.m. they noticed poppy plants with poppy bulbs ripe for extraction of opium in a small field in an orchard between two houses below the road. The owner of the house near the field was called and he disclosed his name to be Dilmi Ram and stated that the field in which the poppy plants were grown belonged to him. Local witnesses were associated and Patwari was called for along with the revenue record. The Patwari reached the spot along with Jamabandi and latha. Photographs were also taken and it was found that 125 poppy plants were grown in the field. The said plants were uprooted and six plants separated as sample plants and two samples of three plants each were prepared. These were duly sealed. The other codal formalities were completed. The Forensic Science Laboratory, Junga submitted its report Ext.PW-10/G in which it was stated 3 that the plants were poppy plants. On the completion of the investigation, challan was filed. The accused on appearance pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. It was incumbent upon the prosecution to prove that the field in which the poppy plants had been grown was owned and possessed by the accused. From the record it is clear that no demarcation was done. Though aks tatima stated to have been prepared on the spot, the khasra number of the land on which the poppy plants were grown is not mentioned in the same. A portion of the land in the aks tatima has been shown to bear khasra No.321/1 but it is not clear as to whether poppy plants were grown on this land or not. As stated above no demarcation has been done and the prosecution has miserably failed to prove that the poppy plants were actually grown on the land owned and possessed by the accused. Merely on the basis of the revenue record it cannot be said that the poppy plants were grown on the land belonging to the accused. There are other various infirmities in the prosecution case but this basic infirmity goes to the root of the case. 4 In view of the above discussion, we find no merit in this petition for leave to appeal which is accordingly rejected. ( Deepak Gupta ), J. June 22, 2009 ( Surinder Singh ), J. PV