BALBIR KAUR versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [2009] 10 S.C.R. 298 · Decided: 07-07-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2009] 10 S.C.R. 298 
BALBIR KAUR 
V. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
(Criminal Appeal No. 2108 of 2008) 
JULY 7, 2009 
[DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA AND DR. B. S. 
CHAUHAN, JJ.] 
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 
c - ss. 15, 50, 52 and 57 - Accused found in possession of 2 
bags containing 61 kg. of contraband - Search made before 
Gazetted Officer by a Lady Constable at the option of the 
accused - Bias alleged against the prosecution - Delay in 
sending the samples; and non-examination of independent 
0 witness, and non-compliance of provisions ulss. 50, 52 and 57 
also alleged - Conviction by Court;.. below - On appeal, held: 
Conscious possession of the accused of the contraband 
proved - Case of bias not made out - Delay has no 
consequence - Allegation of violation of provisions ulss. 52 
E and 57 are technical in nature, in view of finding of 
possessions - Recovery having made from the bags, plea 
as regards violation of s.50 legally untenable. 
AppeHant-accused was prosecuted u/s. 15 of 
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 
F as she was found in possession of 2 bags containing 61 
kgs. of poppy husk, without any permit or licence. She 
was convicted by trial Court. High Court confirmed the 
conviction. Hence the present appeal. 
G 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
Held: 1. The issue with regard to conscious 
possession is to be determined on the fact situation of 
each case. The appellant was found sitting on the bags 
in the road and seeing the police party she behaved in a 
H 
298 
)"\ 
-· 
BALBIR KAUR v. STATE OF PUNJAB 
299 
- suspicious manner. Nothing has come on evidence to A 
show that at that time any other person was present at 
the scene of occurrence. When she was asked about the 
contents in the bag she herself admitted that jt contained 
poppy husk. Therefore, her possession of the 
contraband goods was conscious possession. PW-6 has s 
categorically stated this in his evidence. Not even a 
suggestion was put to him in the cross-examination in 
that regard. In any case the said two bags were carried 
by the appellant as stated by the said witness, and upon 
search the same were found to contain poppy husk .. c 
[Paras 7, 9 and 10] [305-F; 306-B; 307-E-G; 308-A-B] 
2. No case of bias has been made out for the earlier 
proceedings which were initiated by the appellant herself 
by filing an application u/s 438 CrPC for anticipatory bail. 
Another incident which is referred to and relied upon by D 
the defence to show bias is that Sub Inspector (PW-6) 
along with other police officials raided the appellant's 
residence but nothing incriminating was recovered from 
there. That itself does not make out a case of bias when 
she was found in broad light having possession of two 
E 
bags of poppy husk. [Para 10] [308-A-B] 
Madan Lal v. State of H. P. (2003) 7 SCC 465, relied on. 
3. Since recovery of poppy husk was made from the 
bags carried by the appellant, therefore, the submission . F 
that there was violation of the provisions of Sections 52 
- 57 of the NDPS Act is baseless and devoid of any merit. 
[Para 8] [305-G] 
State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh, (1999) 6 SCC 172; 
Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab, (2002) 2 SCC 419; State of G 
Punjab v. Ba/kar Singh, (2004) 3 SCC 582; Dilip v. State of 
M P.; State of Haryana v. Mai Ram, (2008) 8 SCC 292 and 
Hardip Singh v. State of Punjab, (2008) 8 SCC 557, referred 
to. 
H 
300 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009] 'IO S.C.R. 
A 
4. In view of the concurrent findings that the 
appellant was in conscious possession of the said 
contraband goods, the allegation of non-disclosure of the 
purpose of search and the grounds of arrest to her are 
all of technical nature and without being any material 
B force in them. The appellant hersc If knew that she was 
being searched for possession of contraband goods, and 
therefore, she had also sought for protection as provided 
u/ss. 52 and 57 of NDPS Act. The violation of the 
provisions of the NDPS Act was clearly known to her. 
C The allegation that she herself asked for such protection 
instead of prosecution giving her the option to be 
searched before a Gazetted Officer, as required under the 
law, would not in any manner adversely affect her 
conviction and order of sentence passed by the courts 
0 
below. No prejudice could be shown by the appellant 
against the Gazetted Officer and the lady officer present 
at the time of search. [Para 11) [308-B-F] 
5. The recovery of poppy husk was made from t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.