AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (5) TMI 1135
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p of approval to the same. 2. The prosecution case, as unfurled, is that on 17.4.1988, Jarnail Singh, ASI, along with other police officials was patrolling on the canal bridge in the area of village Raidhriana. In the early part of the morning, a truck bearing No. DIL-781 came from the side of village Raidhriana and it was proceeding towards the canal bridge. When the truck reached near the police party, Jarnail Singh, gave a signal with a torch light and asked the driver to stop. After the vehicle stopped, it was circled by the police officials. The driver of the truck, on enquiry, disclosed his name as Balwinder Singh and Devender Singh and Bagga Singh were sitting by his side on the front seat. Jagminder Singh and four others were sitting on the back side of the truck and on a query being made, all except Jagminder Singh jumped from the truck and took to their heels. Chase by the police party was unsuccessful. The persons who were successful in running away are Satta @ Satnam Singh, Amrik Singh, Kulwinder Singh @ Kala and Jagdev Singh @ Jagga. The Investigating Officer apprehended Jagminder Singh, Balwinder Singh, Devinder Singh and Bagga Singh; and in their presence, the vehic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s and Mr. Jayant K. Sud, learned AAG for the State. 6. Learned Counsel for the Appellants, apart from raising the similar contentions which had been raised before the High Court, has also urged that there has been non-compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, which vitiates the conviction. He has also emphasised on the issue of conscious possession by the Appellants and has seriously criticized non-conducting of the test identification parade. Learned Counsel for the State, per contra, has contended that in the instant case there was no need for holding a test identification parade inasmuch as PW-2 and PW-3 have identified the accused persons in court and they had occasion to see the Appellants as they had stopped the truck and had time to see them and their evidence has not been dented despite roving cross-examination. Learned Counsel for the State would also contend that the running away of the accused persons from the spot and their abscondence thereafter prove the factum of their special knowledge about the contents in the bags loaded in the truck and that establishes the conscious state of their mind. 7. Resisting the submission about the non-examination of independent witne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rade would not make inadmissible the evidence of identification in court. The weight to be attached to such identification should be a matter for the courts of fact. 12. In this context, a reference to passage from Visveswaran v. State (2003) 6 SCC 73, would be apt. It is as follows: The identification of the accused either in test identification parade or in Court is not a sine qua non in every case if from the circumstances the guilt is otherwise established. Many a time, crimes are committed under the cover of darkness when none is able to identify the accused. The commission of a crime can be proved also by circumstantial evidence. 13. In the case at hand, as the witnesses have identified the accused-Appellants in the Court and except giving a bald suggestion that they have not seen the accused persons, there is nothing in the cross-examination we are disposed to accept the identification in Court. Hence, the submission canvassed by the learned Counsel for the Appellants on this score pales into insignificance. 14. The next ground of assail pertains to factum of conscious possession. The submission of the learned Counsel for the Appellants is that they were only mov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eps his firearm in his mother's flat which is safer than his own home, he must be considered to be in possession of the same. (See Sullivan v. Earl of Caithness (1976) 1 All ER 844.)" 16. In Dharampal Singh v. State of Punjab (2010) 9 SCC 608, it has been ruled that the expression "possession" is not capable of precise and complete logical definition of universal application in the context of all the statutes. Recently, in Mohan Lal v. State of Rajasthan (2015) 5 SCALE 330, after referring to certain authorities, this Court has held as follows: From the aforesaid exposition of law it is quite vivid that the term "possession" for the purpose of Section 18 of the NDPS Act could mean physical possession with animus, custody or dominion over the prohibited substance with animus or even exercise of dominion and control as a result of concealment. The animus and the mental intent which is the primary and significant element to show and establish possession. Further, personal knowledge as to the existence of the "chattel" i.e. the illegal substance at a particular location or site, at a relevant time and the intention based upon the knowledge, would constitute the unique rela....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sp; 19. In State of H.P. v. Pawan Kumar (2005) 4 SCC 350, it has been held that: 10. We are not concerned here with the wide definition of the word "person", which in the legal world includes corporations, associations or body of individuals as factually in these type of cases search of their premises can be done and not of their person. Having regard to the scheme of the Act and the context in which it has been used in the section it naturally means a human being or a living individual unit and not an artificial person. The word has to be understood in a broad common-sense manner and, therefore, not a naked or nude body of a human being but the manner in which a normal human being will move about in a civilised society. Therefore, the most appropriate meaning of the word "person" appears to be--"the body of a human being as presented to public view usually with its appropriate coverings and clothing". In a civilised society appropriate coverings and clothings are considered absolutely essential and no sane human being comes in the gaze of others without appropriate coverings and clothings. The appropriate coverings will include footwear also as normally it is considered a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hey have been examined as defence witnesses. In such a situation, no adverse inference can be drawn for non-examination of the said witnesses. That apart, the case of the prosecution cannot be rejected solely on the ground that independent witnesses have not been examined when, on the perusal of the evidence on record the Court finds that the case put forth by the prosecution is trustworthy. When the evidence of the official witnesses are trustworthy and credible, there is no reason not to rest the conviction on the basis of their evidence. In this regard, it is profitable to reproduce a passage from State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) v. Sunil (2001) 1 SCC 652 which reads as follows: We feel that it is an archaic notion that actions of the police officer should be approached with initial distrust. We are aware that such a notion was lavishly entertained during the British period and policemen also knew about it. Its hangover persisted during post-independent years but it is time now to start placing at least initial trust on the actions and the documents made by the police. At any rate, the court cannot start with the presumption that the police records are untrustworthy. As a p....