Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bachittar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 23 April, 2024
Author: Karamjit Singh
Bench: Karamjit Singh
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:055115
CRA-S-1557-2020 [1] 2024:PHHC:055115
258
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRA-S-1557-2020
Date of decision: 23.04.2024
Bachhitar Singh ...Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH
Present: Mr. A.S. Brar, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Kuljit Singh, Addl. A.G. Punjab.
****
KARAMJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL)
1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant Bachhitar
Singh under Section 454 Cr.P.C against the observation given by Judge,
Special Court Moga in its judgment dated 18.01.2018 whereby while the
accused persons including the appellant were acquitted of an offence
punishable under Section 15(c) of the NDPS Act, the said Court ordered
confiscation of tractor trolley bearing No.PB-25-B-9855 belonging to the
appellant.
2. Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is the registered
owner of said tractor trolley and in this regard, he referred to copy of
registration certificate Annexure P-1. The counsel for the appellant further
submits that appellant and one Nishan Singh faced trial in criminal case
having FIR No.56 dated 24.06.2012 under Section 15 NDPS Act, Police
Station Mehna, District Moga. In the said criminal case, prosecution alleged
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:055115
CRA-S-1557-2020 [2] 2024:PHHC:055115
that police officials received secret information against both the accused and
apprehended tractor trolley in question while three persons who were sitting
on the said tractor trolley managed to escape and two of them were identified
as petitioner Bachhitar Singh and Nishan Singh by members of the police
party. On checking of the tractor trolley, 15 bags each having 35 kg of poppy
husk were recovered. Subsequently, petitioner and Nishan Singh faced trial
and were finally acquitted vide judgment dated 18.01.2018 by Judge, Special
Court, Moga. The counsel for the appellant further submits that no appeal is
filed by the State against said judgment of acquittal. It is further submitted
that petitioner was falsely implicated in the said case and the tractor trolley in
question was also planted by the police. The counsel for the appellant further
submits that the trial Court while passing judgment dated 18.01.2018 came to
conclusion that PW-5 ASI Gulzar Singh, member of the police party was
inimical towards the petitioner and thus, the fact that petitioner was falsely
implicated in the present case could not be ruled out. The counsel for the
appellant has further submitted that as the prosecution failed to prove
recovery of alleged contraband from tractor trolley in question, the State has
no right to confiscate the same. So, prayer is made that the present appeal be
allowed and the order passed by the trial Court with regard to confiscation of
the said tractor trolley deserves to be set aside.
3. The present appeal is contested by the State counsel who
submits that contraband was recovered from the tractor trolley bearing
No.PB-25-B-9855 which was registered in the name of petitioner. However,
the State counsel on instructions from ASI Sandeep Singh of Police Station
Mehna has not disputed the fact that both the accused including petitioner
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:055115
CRA-S-1557-2020 [3] 2024:PHHC:055115
were acquitted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 18.01.2018 and that no
appeal has been filed by the State against the said judgment.
4. I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the
parties.
5. Admittedly, tractor trolley in question owned by the petitioner
was taken into possession by the police in criminal case having FIR No.56
dated 24.06.2012 under Section 15 of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station
Mehna, District Moga and in the said trial, both the accused including
petitioner were acquitted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 18.01.2018.
The State had not filed any appeal to challenge the said judgment of acquittal.
6. Undoubtedly, appellant who faced trial was acquitted vide
judgment dated 18.01.2018. Thus, it is apparent that appellant had no
knowledge that the tractor trolley owned by him was being used for
transporting narcotics. Further, no notice or opportunity of hearing was given
to the appellant by the trial Court while directing confiscation of his tractor
trolley bearing No.PB-25-B-9855. In the given circumstances, the direction
given by the trial Court regarding confiscation of the said vehicle is not
sustainable in the eyes of law and deserves to be set aside.
7. In light of the above discussion, the present appeal is allowed
and the judgment dated 18.01.2018 passed by Judge, Special Court, Moga to
the extent whereby direction is given to confiscate tractor trolley bearing
No.PB-25-B-9855 to the State, is hereby set aside.
23.04.2024 (KARAMJIT SINGH)
Yogesh JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
3 of 3
