IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 134/2023 @ SLP(Crl) No.823/2023
@ DIARY NO(S). 23330/2022
KHEM CHAND APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
The appeal is taken up for hearing. The appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 31.08.2018 passed by
the Division Bench of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla, thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant challenging the judgment and order dated 14.6.2016 passed by the Special judge, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, thereby convicting for offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short NDPS Act) and sentencing the appellant herein to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of 10 years and pay fine of Rs.1,00,000/-.
The prosecution case is that on 20.11.2014 at about 5:55 p.m., when the appellant was apprehended by the police of Police Station Bhunter, District Kullu near Kamand-dhar, he was found in conscious and exclusive possession of charas weighing 2 kg. 100 grams.
The prosecution case basically rests on the evidence of PW.7-Inspector Tenzing, who is the Investigating Officer
(for short I.O.)
The I.O. has admitted in his evidence that he did not try to associate any independent witnesses. He further states that he also did not think it appropriate to give his personal search to the accused before taking search of alleged bag of the accused nor any memo was prepared. It is further to be noted that though according to I.O. he had put the seal of H at the seized material, the report of the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Shimla would reveal that the parcels which were received were having nine seals of M and four seals of O.
These discrepancies have not been explained by the prosecution. No doubt that this appeal appeal arises out of concurrent findings. However, in the facts of the present case when the I.O. is himself has not supported the prosecution case and there are material discrepancies in the seal of the samples which were sent to State Forensic Science Laboratory, Shimla by the I.O., the appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt.
The appeal is, therefore, allowed and the order of conviction and sentence is set aside.

The appellant is directed to be released forthwith, if his detention is not required in any other case.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
………………………… J
( B.R. GAVAI )
………………………… J
( VIKRAM NATH )
NEW DELHI;
JANUARY 16, 2023
3 ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.8 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) .
@ DIARY NO(S). 23330/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 31-08-2018 in CRA No. 554/2016 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla)
KHEM CHAND PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH RESPONDENT(S)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No. 370/203 – Bail Application IA
No.107938/2022-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA
No.107939/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 107938/2022 – CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING
IA No. 107939/2022 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 370/2023 – GRANT OF BAIL)
Date : 16-01-2023 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ajay Marwah, AOR
Mr. Tapan Masta, Adv.
Mr. Parantap Singh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhimanyu Jhamba,Adv.
Ms. Thonpinao Thangal,Adv.
Mr. Samir Ali Khan, AOR
Mr. Nikhil Jagotra,Adv.
Ms. Richa,Adv.
Mr. Shivam Prashar,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed, in terms of the signed order. The appellant is directed to be released forthwith, if his detention is not required in any other case.
(NARENDRA PRASAD) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
(Signed order is placed on the file)
4