Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, February 2
An unexplained lapse on the prosecution’s part has led to the acquittal of three convicts by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a drugs case.
The Bench of Justice Ajay Tewari and Justice Pankaj Jain was told that 26 sample parcels from a consignment allegedly meant for an Indo-Pak smuggler were received by a forensic chemical laboratory on March 26, 2010. But all 52 sample parcels were produced before a court on March 30, 2010, evident from an order passed by the Zira Judicial Magistrate First Class.
The Bench asserted there were admittedly 78 parcels, including 26 bulk parcels and 52 sample parcels. The same were produced before the court on March 22, 2010. After finding the seals intact, the case property was ordered to be kept in a judicial malkhana.
The prosecution claimed that 26 out of 52 sample parcels were sent to a forensic laboratory on March 26, 2010. The lab report also showed that 26 sample parcels were received on that date. As such, the prosecution was left with 26 bulk parcels and 26 samples parcels on March 30, 2010.
But the order dated March 30, 2010, indicated that all 78 parcels were produced before the court. It ordered the 26 sample parcels to be sent for chemical examination on that date.
The Bench added reading of case documents raised serious question about the sample parcels being sent to the lab on March 26, 2010, and an application dated March 30, 2010, produced by the state counsel compounded it further. The prosecution had requested the court to order the deposition of bulk parcels and 26 sample parcels in the judicial malkhana. The remaining 26 sample parcels were requested to be sent for chemical examination.
“If that is so, how can the report based on 26 sample parcels received by lab on March 26, 2010, be linked to contraband recovered in this case?” the Bench questioned after hearing advocates Ashwani Bhardwaj, Vipul Jindal, Jashandeep Singh Sandhu, RS Sekhon and Pankaj Bhardwaj for the appellants.
Speaking for the Bench, Justice Jain asserted: “In the trials under the NDPS Act, samples of the contraband recovered and the chemical examination thereof is a vital link that yokes the accused to the charge. In the present case, the said link has gone amiss. Burden to prove guilt of accused rests upon the prosecution. It is cast with the duty to satisfy the same beyond all reasonable doubt. The prosecution cannot at any stage afford to jettison the said burden and take the trial lightly.”
The Bench ordered the setting aside of their conviction in the drugs case, but maintained their conviction and sentence for attempt to murder and other offences under Section 307 of the IPC and the provisions of the Arms Act.
Vital link amiss: HC
In the trials under the NDPS Act, samples of the contraband recovered and the chemical examination thereof is a vital link that yokes the accused to the charge. In the present case, the said link has gone amiss. Burden to prove guilt of accused rests upon the prosecution. It is cast with the duty to satisfy the same beyond all reasonable doubt.
Prosecution’s lapse leads to acquittal of three
{$excerpt:n}
