Acquittal Upheld: Punjab & Haryana HC Refuses State’s Plea in NDPS Case Over Dubious Recovery Pattern
Case Name: State of Punjab v. Gurdit Singh @ Vishal & Another
Citation: CRM-A-731-2024.
Date of Judgment: 28 March 2025.
Bench: Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur (DB)
Held: The Punjab & Haryana High Court declined the State’s application seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal of the accused in an NDPS case, holding that the prosecution had failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court found no perversity in the trial court’s reasoning and emphasized that strict compliance with procedural safeguards under the NDPS Act is essential, especially where the punishment is stringent.
Summary: The case arose from an alleged recovery on 07.11.2020 when Gurdit Singh @ Vishal was apprehended carrying a polythene bag containing 1500 Tramadol Hydrochloride tablets. He was accused of possessing the contraband without authorization, and a disclosure statement implicated co-accused Satyam Kumar as the supplier. The trial court acquitted both accused on 25.09.2023, and the State challenged this acquittal by filing the present application for leave to appeal.
The High Court, upon examining the record, upheld the trial court’s findings. It noted that HC Beant Singh, the first informer and a crucial link in the prosecution story, had not been examined, creating a gap in the chain of evidence. Further, a striking pattern emerged where in three consecutive FIRs dated 07.11.2020, 08.11.2020, and 09.11.2020, recoveries of exactly 1500 Tramadol tablets were shown, all bearing identical batch numbers and expiry dates, rendering the narrative highly suspicious. The Court also pointed out that despite attempts, no independent witnesses were joined to corroborate the prosecution version, which further weakened the case. Moreover, there was no evidence establishing any nexus between Gurdit Singh and Satyam Kumar, nor was it explained how the contraband came into their possession. The unexplained circumstance of Gurdit Singh using a motorcycle belonging to a third party added to the doubts.
In these circumstances, the High Court concluded that the prosecution’s case was riddled with inconsistencies and lacked credibility. Since the NDPS Act mandates strict proof owing to its harsh penalties, the accused were entitled to benefit of doubt.
Decision: The Court found no infirmity or illegality in the judgment of acquittal and accordingly dismissed the State’s application for leave to appeal, thereby affirming the acquittal of the respondents.
#NDPSAct #PunjabHaryanaHighCourt #TramadolCase #CriminalLaw #BenefitOfDoubt #HighCourtJudgment