- DEHAL SINGH VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
- Bench: H.S. Bedi and C.K. Prasad, JJ.
Facts:
The present case arise out of the case brought up by the Prosecution and accepted by both the Courts i.e. trial and appellate Court. Police personnel were present for a routine-check at Lalit Chowk at Sundernagar in the District of Mandi.
- Brijesh Sood received a tip that a car is coming from Mandi District in which two people are presumed to be carrying huge quantity of Narcotic substances.
- Both the appellants have been found travelling in the car from which Narcotics Substance was recovered and were in custody.
- Two samples of Narcotics were sent to the Chemical Examiner in order to register Charge Sheet against the Accused.
- Police Officer during trial also submitted that appellant cannot be held to be in conscious possession of the Narcotics as he had taken lift in the vehicle and he was not aware of the fact that Narcotics was being transported in the vehicle according to the Accused statement made under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
Appellant’s Submission:
- Appellant contented that though option was given to the appellant to be searched before a Gazette Officer or nearest Magistrate but they were not aware of their right to be searched in their presence.
- The Appellant submitted that discrepancy in weight of sample which were taken and sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination creates doubt to the credibility of the prosecution case.
Final Judgement:
Attention has been drawn by the judgment of this present case, it was held that Statement of an accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is recorded without administering oath and, therefore, said statement cannot be treated as evidence within the meaning of Section 3 of the Evidence Act. The contentions of the appellant were denied by the bench and it was concluded that
Section 35 of the NDPS Act recognizes that once possession is established the Court can presume that the accused had a culpable mental state quashing the statements submitted by the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, A person who divulge that he was not in conscious possession has to prove it, may be presumed to have committed the offence unless he accounts for satisfactorily the possession of the smuggle.
