BHOLA SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [2011] 2 S.C.R. 642 · Decided: 08-02-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: H.S. BEDI, C.K. PRASAD · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

, A . 
B 
[2011] 2 S.C.R. 642 
BHOLA SINGH 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
(Criminal Appeal No. 448 of 2006) 
FEBRUARY 8, 2011 
[HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND CHANDRAMAULI KR. 
PRASAD, JJ.] 
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985: 
C ss.25, 35 - Applicability of - Contraband goods recovered 
from the truck co-owned by the appellant - While purchasing 
the truck, the appellant had given his residential address in 
Rajasthan whereas he was resident of Haryana - High Court 
drew presumption against the appellant u/s. 35 to hold that by 
D giving a fake address, his culpability was writ large on the facts 
of the case - Conviction of appellant uslss.25 and 35 - Held: 
s.25 would not be applicable as there was no evidence to 
indicate that the appellant had knowingly permitted the use 
of the vehicle for any improper purpose -
s.35 also 
E presupposes that the culpable mental state of an accused has 
to b13 proved as a fact beyond reasonable doubt and not 
merely when its existence is established by a preponderance 
of probabilities - Burden to prove that the appellant had 
knowledge that the vehicle he owned was being used for 
F 
transporting narcotics lay on the prosecution and it is only 
after the evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt, that he 
had knowledge, would presumption uls. 35 arise - In the 
absence of any evidence with regard to the mental state of 
the appellant, no presumption uls.35 can be drawn - The only 
evidence which the prosecution sought to rely on was the 
G appellant's conduct in giving his residential address in 
Rajasthan although he was a resident of Haryana while 
registering the offending truck cannot fasten him, with the 
knowledge of its misuse by the driver and others - Judgments 
H 
642 
BHOLA SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 
643 
of the courts below set aside and acquittal ordered. 
Noor Aga vs. State of Punjab and Anr. (2008) 16 SCC 
417 - relied on. 
Case law reference: 
(2008) 16 sec 417 
relied on 
Para 10 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal 
No. 448 of 2006. 
A 
B 
From the Judgment & Order dated 5.7.2004 of the High C 
Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal 
No. 292-DB, 579-DB, and 580-08 of 2003. 
Triloki Nath Razdan, Smirti Razdan, P.P.N. Razdan for the 
Appellant. 
Kuldeep Singh, K.K. Pandey, H.S. Sandhu for the 
Respondent. 
The following order of the Court was delivered 
ORDER 
We have heard the learned counsel for the State. 
This appeal by way of special leave arises out of the 
D 
E 
following facts: 
F 
On 22nd November, 1999 PW.6-Sub-lnspector Manohar 
Singh along with other police officials was present on the bridge 
over the seepage drain near village Akkanwali. One Janak Raj, 
was also along with them. At about 7.00 a.m. Truck No. RJ-31 
G 
G-0859 driven by accused Bansi Lal came from the side of 
village Akkanwali. The truck was stopped on the signal of Sub-
Inspector Manohar Singh and on enquiry the Driver disclosed 
his name as Bansi Lal son of Neki Ram, resident of Mira Khan 
H 
644 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
Ki Dhani, Village Maur Bingar, Police Station, Fatehabad. 
Three other persons namely Nirbhai Singh, Gora Singh and 
Gurmit Singh were found sitting on the bags which were lying 
in the body of the truck. It also came to the notice of the Sub-
Inspector that Gora Singh and Gurmit Singh were the brothers-
B in-law of Nirbhai Singh. 
An offer under Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and 
Psychotropic Substances Act ( hereinafter called the 'Act') was 
made to the accused. They opted to be searched in the 
C presence of a Gazetted Officer. DSP Baljit Singh (PW.1) was 
then requested to reach the spot. The truck was thereafter 
searched and 16 bags of poppy husk each containing 30 kg. 
were found in the truck. Samples etc. were taken and sent to 
the laboratory for analysis which opined that the contraband was 
indeed poppy husk. It also transpired during the investigation 
D that Bhola Singh, the appellant before us, was a co-owner of 
the truck. He along with others was accordingly charged for an 
offence punishable under Section 15 of the Act whereas Bhola 
Singh and Bansi Lal were also charged under Section 25 
thereof. The Trial Court on a consideration of the evidence 
E convicted the accused and sentenced them to undergo 12 years 
RI each and a fine of rupees one lakh and in default of payment, 
RI for two years. 
The matter was thereafter taken in appeal by the accused. 
F The High Court dismissed the appeal and it

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