1

                                            REPORTABLE        

  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 2106 OF 2008

BAHADUR SINGH                         ..  Appellant (s)

                VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB    ..  Respondent(s)   

   O R D E R

This appeal is directed against the  judgment and order  

dated 29th May, 2008  of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana,  

whereby the acquittal of the appellant-Bahadur Singh for an  

offence punishable under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs &  

Psychotropic Substances Act,1985, (hereinafter referred to as  

'the Act') has been set aside and he has been convicted under  

that provision  and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment  

for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.one lakh and in default in  

payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment  for  

one year.

2. The facts are as under:-

3. At about 6.30 p.m. on the 5th December, 1995, a police  

party headed by SHO Rajbir Singh held a special nakabandi under  

the supervision of PW-3 Gurmeet Singh, Superintendent of Police  

(Headquarters).   At about 6.45 p.m. two persons were spotted

2

coming towards them.   On seeing the police party, one of the  

persons ran towards the taxi stand, whereas the other attempted  

to turn towards Amloh Chowk.   A party led by inspector Rajbir  

Singh followed the person proceeding  towards Amloh Chowk and  

apprehended him.   He turned out to be Bahadur Singh, the  

appellant.   He was also found to be carrying a bag in his  

right hand which was suspected to contain contraband.   An  

offer under Section 50 of the Act was made to him by inspector  

Rajbir Singh.   The appellant stated that he would  like to be  

searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer.   PW-3 Gurmeet  

Singh was accordingly requested to be present.   The bag was  

searched and 10 Kgs.of opium was found therein.    A sample of  

20 grams was separated and the balance of the opium was sealed  

and was entrusted to PW Mohinder Singh.   It appears that the  

person who had run towards the taxi stand was also apprehended  

by another police party and 10 kg.of opium was also recovered  

from him.   That man was Darshan Khan.  Two trials were held  

thereafter, one with respect to the appellant, Bahadur Singh  

and  the  other  with  respect  to  Darshan  Khan.    It  is  the  

admitted position that Darshan Khan's conviction has attained  

finality.     Bahadur  Singh  was,  however,  tried  by  the  

Additional  Sessions  Judge,  Ludhiana,  who  held  that  the  

Prosecution story was doubtful and accordingly acquitted him.  

In arriving at this conclusion, the trial court observed that  

the provisions of Sections 50, 55 and 57 of the Act had been  

violated.     It was further found that as per the press note

3

published in the Daily “Jagbani”, Jalandhar (Ex.DD) dated 8th  

December, 1995, it had been brought out that  20 kgs. of opium  

had been recovered from Darshan Khan by SI Bhupinder Singh and  

there was no reference to the appellant.  The trial court's  

judgment  has been  reversed in  appeal by  the High  Court by  

observing that the provisions of Section 50 of the Act were not  

applicable in the facts of the present case and that in any  

event,  the  press  note,  Exhibit  DD  could  not  be  taken  in  

evidence and no reliance could thus be placed thereon,  with  

regard to its contents.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having  

gone through the records and materials placed before us, we  

find that provisions of Section 50 of the Act would not be  

applicable in the present case.   The opium had allegedly been  

recovered, from a bag, which the appellant was carrying, as per  

the  prosecution  story.    We,  however,  find  that  the  

observations of the High Court that the press note, Exhibit DD,  

could not be relied upon appears to be unacceptable.    We must  

note that the High Court had proceeded on the basis  that  

Exhibit DD was a news item, whereas it is clear from Exhibit  

DD, that it was a press note issued by the SSP Khanna, Shri  

Arun Kumar Mittal.    We have gone through this document and  

find that it clearly states that as per prior information that  

opium smugglers from Madhya Pradesh would be selling opium, a  

police naka had been organised and two persons had alighted  

from a bus   and on seeing the police had run in the different

4

directions and   of them, one person was the appellant and the  

other was Darshan Khan and that 20 kilograms of opium had been  

recovered  from  the  bag  carried  by  Darshan  Khan.    PW3  SP  

Gurmeet Singh, in his cross-examination admitted that the press  

note  had  indeed  been  issued  and  published  in  the  daily  

“Jagbani” dated 8th December, 1995.   On reading the press  

note, he stated that it referred to the naka in which the  

alleged opium had been recovered.   In our view, the High  

Court's  observation that Exhibit DD being a news item could  

not be taken into evidence, is not correct, as the veracity of  

the contents of the document, had been accepted by PW-3.   We  

accordingly find that the recovery of 10 Kgs. of opium from the  

appellant becomes suspect.

5. We may also highlight that the trial court had taken a  

view  in  favour  of  the  accused  on  a  consideration  of  the  

evidence, and as that view was clearly possible, the High Court  

should  not  have  interfered   in  the  matter  in  an  appeal  

against acquittal.

6. We, accordingly, allow this appeal, set aside the order  

of the High Court and order the acquittal of the appellant.   

7. We also direct that the appellant,  who is in custody,  

shall  be  released  forthwith  if  not  wanted/required  in  

connection with any other case.   

        ......................J.          (HARJIT SINGH BEDI)

5

    ......................J.

                      (CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD)     NEW DELHI;     April 26,  2011.