Drugs case: Human beings have tendency to succumb to temptation, says Punjab and Haryana High Court
Chandigarh, September 13
Human beings have a tendency to succumb to temptation or they tend to depose wrongly for some allurement under coercion, pressure or for any other reason, the Punjab and Haryana High Court asserted while making it clear that such conduct will not demolish the entire prosecution case.
The assertion came as the high court dismissed an appeal filed more than 15 years ago by two convicts in a drugs case. The high court also directed the withdrawal of orders suspending sentence and granting bail to them during their appeals’ pendency.
Justice HS Madaan also directed the appellants-accused to surrender before the Patiala Chief Judicial Magistrate within a week.
The accused had moved the high court challenging the trial court’s judgment dated August 22, 2007, whereby they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and pay Rs 1 lakh fine each after being convicted under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
One of the arguments before the Bench by their counsel was that an independent witness, joined with the police, was not examined by the prosecution. Appearing as a defence witness, he had denied that the accused were arrested or any recovery was carried out from them.
He, rather, stated that the police took his signatures on blank papers. The counsel added a serious dent, as such, was caused to the prosecution story, making it unreliable.
The state counsel, on the other hand, had contended that the accused were able to win over the independent witness. He resiled from his statement during the investigation in an attempt to help the accused in earning an acquittal.
Justice Madaan asserted mere non-examination of the independent witness by the prosecution and his opting to appear as a witness for the defence would not cause any damage to the prosecution story. The Judge added that the Division Bench judgment was fully applicable to the case.
Elaborating, Justice Madaan asserted the Bench had rejected the account of an independent witness, who was joined by the police party during search and recovery, but later appeared as a defence witness. He had denied his joining as a witness to search and recovery, stating that his signatures were procured on blank papers when he visited the police station in an inebriated condition.
The Bench said it was unbelievable that numerous signatures could be signed by a witness on blank papers, and that too when contraband recovery, stood proved. He was held to be unreliable and his testimony was rightly discarded.
