Chain Of Evidence Missing: Punjab & Haryana High Court Acquits Man Convicted To 10 Years Imprisonment Under NDPS Act
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has acquitted a man convicted under the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 520 grams of contraband, observing that the deficiency in the prosecution does not inspire confidence.Pointing out the gaps in the evidence, Justice Arun Monga said,“Deficiencies and inconsistencies in the evidence presented by the prosecution do not inspire confidence, as...
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has acquitted a man convicted under the NDPS Act for allegedly possessing 520 grams of contraband, observing that the deficiency in the prosecution does not inspire confidence.
Pointing out the gaps in the evidence, Justice Arun Monga said,
“Deficiencies and inconsistencies in the evidence presented by the prosecution do not inspire confidence, as already discussed in the preceding paragraphs. One of the critical issue herein is the the unsatisfactory nature of the link evidence presented by the prosecution. Link evidence connects various elements of a case together and, in this context, it is very vital connection between seized articles and their subsequent handling.”
The Court noted that although the prosecution claimed that the seized powder was placed in the Malkhana on a specific date, the Malkhana register was not presented as evidence to support this claim. The absence of documentary evidence thus weakens the prosecution's case. The trial court could not have verified the authenticity and timing of the placement of the seized substance in the malkhana, it added further.
These observations came in an appeal filed by Gurpreet Singh against the conviction order passed by the Special Court of Gurdaspur. He was allegedly caught in possession of 520 grams of contraband during patrolling and thereafter convicted and sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment in 2015.
The Amicus Curiae advocate Amit Sharma, submitted it is the admitted situation that there is non-compliance with the mandatory provision of Section 52-A(2) of the Act. Even the procedural safeguards as mandated under the Act were not followed. No independent witness was joined. The prosecution failed to give any plausible explanation for the same.
Sharma further highlighted that there was a delay of 12 days in sending the samples to FSL.
Considering the submissions, the Court opined that in light of gaps in evidence, there is insufficient proof to convincingly establish that the seals on the sample parcels were the original seals affixed at the time of seizure. This becomes a critical issue as proper sealing is essential to maintaining the integrity of evidence.
“This weaknesses in the prosecution's case is very significant factor in favor of the appellant. Evidence presented by the prosecution is thus inadequate to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in this case,” the Court observed.
Consequently, the appeal was allowed and set aside the sentence stating that,
“The appellant, whose sentence was suspended vide order dated 27.05.2021, is acquitted of charge framed against him. His bail bonds and surety bonds stand discharged. Appellant, if in custody in present case, be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.”
Case Title: Gurpreet Singh v. State of Punjab
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 159
Appearance: Amit Sharma, Advocate as Amicus Curiae
Mohit Thakur, AAG, Punjab.