SC Calls Upon Registrar Of HP High Court To Indicate The Reasons As To Why Trial Court Records Have Not Been Sent To The Top Court's Registry

The bench of Justices UU Lalit, SR Bhat and PS Narasimha issued the directions after taking into consideration the fact that the matter was adjourned earlier on two occasions to await the record.

On December 15, 2021 and January 11, 2022 the bench had summoned for Trial Court's record by sending appropriate communications to the High Court/Trial Court.

Remarking that this had caused not only serious prejudice to the petitioner undergoing sentence but also tends to waste the judicial time the bench in their order said,

"The Registrar of the High Court, is therefore, called upon to file a report indicating the steps taken pursuant to the order of this Court and the reasons why the record has not yet been sent to the Registry of this Court."

Asking the Registrar to share the records with the Registry by March 20, 2022 the bench sought personal presence of concerned officials of the Trial as well as High Court on failure to do so.

"The record must be received in the Registry of this Court by 20.03.2022. In case the record is not submitted, the concerned officials from the Trial Court and the High Court shall remain personally present on the next occasion," the bench in its order said.

Factual Background

On February 8, 2015 pursuant to orders passed by the superior authorities, at about 2:00 AM, the accused was caught with a bag containing fourteen packets of contraband substance which appeared to be charas. A FIR was registered and the accused was charged for having committed an offence punishable under the provisions of Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

The Trial Court while convicting the accused sentenced him to imprisonment and also imposed a fine.

Aggrieved the accused had approached the High Court.

The High Court while upholding Trial Court's order in their order said,

" The ocular version as also the documentary evidence clearly establishes complicity of the convict in the alleged crime. The testimonies of prosecution witnesses are totally reliable and their depositions believable. There are no major contradictions rendering their version to be unbelievable.

27. Hence, in our considered view, prosecution has been able to discharge the burden of proving the recovery of the contraband substance from the conscious possession of the accused, beyond reasonable doubt. It cannot be said that the trial Court erred in correctly and completely appreciating the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses."

Case Title: Naresh Bahadur Sahi v State of Himachal Pradesh| Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 707/2019