2 drug peddlers sentenced to 12 years rigorous imprisonment

LUDHIANA: A local court has sentenced two drug peddlers to 12 years rigorous imprisonment after finding them guilty of conscious possession of 245kg of poppy husk. Special court judge Atul Kasana also imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh each on the convicts, and in default of payment of fine, they will have to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a year.

On 12 May 2014, Dehlon police had booked Jaswant Singh (a cultivator of Quila Raipur in Dehlon), and Jaspal Singh (a labourer of the same village), on allegations that 245kg of poppy husk was recovered from them. As per prosection, inspector Rajesh Kumar (investigating officer) had set up a checkpost at Quila Raipur railway crossing on Pakhowal Road, to check suspected vehicles and persons. At about 1.15pm, an Indigo car of silver colour — in which there were two persons, including the driver — was seen coming from the side of Dehlon village.

On seeing the police party, the driver stopped his car at some distance from the checkpost and tried to turn his car back towards Dehlon. On suspicion, they were apprehended by the investigating officer with the help of the police party. Later, in the presence of ACP Crime Jaswinder Singh, police recovered three heavy plastic bags from the car’s backseat, and four heavy plastic bags from the boot, that were later found to be a total of 245kg poppy husk. Police, after arresting the accused, presented a challan against them in the court of law.

During the trial, the accused pleaded innocence. The additional public prosecutor for the state pleaded for punishment to the accused on the basis of witnesses and link evidence. He contended that all recovery witnesses being police officials and non-joining of an independent witness did not have any adverse effect on the case of the prosecution, and submitted that the search and seizure stood duly proved. He further submitted that recovery witnesses have supported the prosecution’s case, and there was no inherent contradiction or inconsistency in their statement.

The defence counsel argued that no independent witness was joined in the investigation despite availability, and there was nothing on record to show whether any effort was made to join an independent witness. He submitted that the versions of IO as well as the DSP (ACP crime) were contradictory.

The court did not find any merit in the contention of the defence counsel that no independent witness was joined, and there was a contradiction in the versions of IO and DSP. It was the contention of the defence that non-joining itself created a doubt on prosecution witnesses, as recovery was effected from a public place, and there were availability of persons from the public.

The court observed: “No doubt, none from the public has been joined as witness at the time of recovery, yet the mere non-joining of any independent witness does not render the entire prosecution version unbelievable, especially when no enmity or ill-will on the part of police officials has been proved on record to falsely implicate the accused.” The court, after taking the evidence on record, sentenced the accused.