--- 2023 PCrLJ 139 2023 YLRN 58
Safe custody ---Scope---Accused was alleged to have been found in possession of 1200 grams of charas---Moharrar stated that he gave the sample parcel to sample-bearer for its onward transmission to the Forensic Laboratory but the sample-bearer while appearing in the witness box did not say a single word regarding handing over of the sample parcel to him by Moharrar or deposit of the same in the Forensic Laboratory, therefore, it was not determinable as to where the sample parcel remained after its delivery to sample-bearer---Safe custody of sample-parcel was not proved beyond the shadow of doubt which had created serious dent in the prosecution case---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.
2023 YLRN 25
Prosecution case was that 5324 grams of Heroin and 2680 grams of Charas were recovered from the possession of accused---Evidently, accused had been convicted on two counts, one for recovery of Heroin and other for possessing the Charas---High Court observed that in case of various type of contraband there was no distinction under S. 9 of the Act, however the discretion had been left at the court for quantum of sentence if quantity did not exceed 10 kilograms, who, keeping in view the kind of recovered material, its effect on human lives and society or other considerations as the case may be, had to ascertain the amount of punishment and that sentencing was not an easy process but difficult stage for a judge and was an attempt to juggle the objects of various sizes while walking on a tight rope which was being shaken at both ends---Court felt no difficulty to hold that in case of recovery of contraband of more than one kind, it would be considered single recovery against an offender with accumulative weight---Although various contentions had been raised by defence like that chain of Safe custody had not been proved and summoning of record of 'Roznamcha' of the Police Station with reference to report but as the Trial Court had committed serious illegality while convicting the accused on two counts therefore, all concerned to the matter were in agreement that it was a case of remand---Appeal was allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment and case was remanded to the Trial Court with direction to rewrite the judgment after giving a proper right of hearing to both the sides
0 Comments