Punjab and Haryana High Court sets aside conviction in NDPS case over concealment of facts by prosecution

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently set aside conviction of an accused in a drugs case on the ground that the prosecution had not disclosed to the trial court the details of an objection raised by a Forensic Science Lab (FSL) [Zorawar Singh @ Shenty vs. State of Punjab].Justice Pankaj Jain said that an investigating agency “cannot hide proceedings” from the Court as its duty is to investigate the crime and not to ensure that the accused is punished. The Court further said that fairness of trial demands that the accused must be made aware of all the circumstances against him. “After all, the quest is for the truth. The fairness of investigation is expected from the prosecution not only qua the stand of the prosecution but also from the point of view of the defence,” remarked the Court..The Court stressed that in the trials involving narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, the sampling as well as forensic reports are crucial.Therefore, the Court observed that once there was an objection from the FSL, it was the prosecution’s duty to come clean and about.“Concealment of this vital fact from the accused is fatal to the prosecution and defeats the whole object of the fair trial,” said the Court..In the present case, Zorawar Singh @ Shenty and a co-accused had been convicted by a court in Patiala in 2016 in a case under Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act after the alleged recovery of illicit drugs. Zorawar Singh was sentenced to three years of imprisonment..While considering Singh’s appeal against his conviction, the High Court found that Section 22 (punishment for contravention in relation to psychotropic substances) of the NDPS Act was mentioned in advance in all the case-related memos. This led the Court to infer that the Investigating Officer (IO) was in knowledge of of the offence for which accused were to be booked even before they were booked. “The I.O. being in the knowledge of the charging section even prior to recovery of the contraband at the time he obtained consent of the suspect does not augur well with the fairness expected from the prosecution,” the Court said..However, the Court found a more glaring error in that the IO had not disclosed an objection that was raised by a FSL against the sample sent to it by the investigating agency.Calling it fatal to the prosecution’s case, the Court said, “The said objection has been kept under wraps. Prosecution opted not to reveal the nature of objection(s) raised by the Forensic Lab. I.O. remains secretive even while deposition.”It thus concluded that Singh had not been tried fairly and acquitted him. “In view of above, this Court finds that the present appeal deserves acceptance and the same is accepted. Impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.12.2016 is set aside. Appellant is acquitted,” the Court ordered..Advocate Saurabh Kapoor represented the appellant.Additional Advocate General Kunal Vinayak represented the State..[Read Order]