Criminal Misc. No. A-59-MA of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Misc. No. A-59-MA of 2009 Date of Decision: 26.2.2009 State of Haryana …Petitioner Versus Jaswinder Singh and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. S.S. Mor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for the petitioner. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) This application under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. has been filed by the State of Haryana seeking leave to file appeal against acquittal of Jaswinder Singh alias Lakha and Amarjit Singh who were tried as accused in case FIR No. 133 dated 5.7.2006 registered at Police Station Guhla, under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as `the Act'). At the outset, counsel for the State has submitted that from both the respondents 1 Kg. & 500 grams of poppy husk was recovered. Prosecution story which can be gathered from the impugned judgment is that police party was patrolling for detection of crime and two persons were seen coming on motorcycle from the side of village Danhera. On suspicion they were signalled. They were interrogated regarding their names. It is stated that pillion rider of the motorcycle was Criminal Misc. No. A-59-MA of 2009 2 holding a potly (pouch) which was wrapped in parna in his hand. Notice under Section 50 of the Act was given. Accused were asked to exercise option to get themselves searched from the Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. Thereafter, the statements of accused were recorded. Ex.PD is statement of Jaswinder Singh alias Lakha and Ex.PE is statement qua Amarjit Singh. On search, 1 Kg. & 500 grams of poppy husk. Eight witnesses appeared to fortify the case of prosecution. Trial Court found that in the present case, a small quantity of poppy husk has been recovered. The village was at a distance of half furlong from the spot. No specific explanation has been furnished by the police officials as to why no independent witness was joined. The Court further held that for a period of four hours when investigation was in progress it is not plausible that no person passed from that area and was not requested to join investigation. The Court below has also not appreciated as to why no respectable from the village like Sarpanch or Lambardar was called. The trial Court further held that the act and conduct of PW.2 Dharam Pal, Head Constable, and PW.8 Desh Raj, Assistant Sub Inspector, make prosecution version doubtful. It was held that their testimony in no way aspire confidence. Reasons stated in para 19 of the judgment not to place implicit reliance upon these two witnesses are well founded. Authenticity of ruqa Ex.PG has also been doubted. The Court below further held that ruqa Ex.PG and consent memos Ex.PD and PE are in variance and thus investigation was held to be tainted. I have perused the judgment which is based on sound reasons. The judgment of trial Court is not perverse. Therefore, no Criminal Misc. No. A-59-MA of 2009 3 interference is warranted and hence, the present application seeking leave to appeal is dismissed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge February 26, 2009 “DK”