Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Trial Court Judgement Finding Prosecution Story In NDPS Case 'Fake' Considering Discrepancies In Evidence
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, while dealing with an appeal preferred by the UT administration of Chandigarh against the judgment of the Trial Court in a matter registered under Section 20 of NDPS Act, held that the trial Court was correct in holding that the prosecution witnesses are not trustworthy and the seal, samples, documents etc. are tampered. The trial Court had went on...
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, while dealing with an appeal preferred by the UT administration of Chandigarh against the judgment of the Trial Court in a matter registered under Section 20 of NDPS Act, held that the trial Court was correct in holding that the prosecution witnesses are not trustworthy and the seal, samples, documents etc. are tampered.
The trial Court had went on to remark that the evidence on record appeared to be prepared while sitting in the police station and that the prosecution story was 'concocted' and 'fake'.
While upholding the judgment, a bench comprising Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj remarked,
"Upon consideration of the reasons mentioned by the Judge, Special Court, Chandigarh, it is evident that all the crucial aspects have been duly considered by the trial Court. The findings recorded by the Court thus cannot be said to be perverse or unsustainable."
It was alleged that the accused turned back on seeing the Police Party. Thereafter he was nabbed and 220 grams charas was recovered from a tiffin possessed by him.
The trial court noted that from the evidence of members of patrolling party and the SHO, it is clear that the seal was not properly used and there are material discrepancies with regard to use of seal, which makes the prosecution case highly doubtful. It also cited several contradictions in the statements made by the police.
The High Court noted that the Trial Court duly considered prosecution's evidence and came to the conclusion that there are several discrepancies in their evidence. Apart from that it was noted that the prosecution has failed to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt and what it can produce suffers from suspicious circumstances.
Furthermore, the court noted that no independent witness was produced to add credence to the prosecution story. Testimonies of the police officials also suffer from major contradictions.
Addl. P.P. for the UT also could not produce any evidence to show that the findings recorded by the Trial Court suffer from misappreciation of evidence or is in defiance of settled position of the law.
Therefore, the court noted that there is no ground warranting interference in the impugned judgment. Accordingly, instant appeal stands dismissed.
Case Title: STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH Versus SHANKAR
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 184