STATE OF H P vs RAMESH CHAND

Challenge in this appeal is of the order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge, Mandi, acquitting the respondent/accused for offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

The prosecution case in brief is that Inspector Dabe Ram of Police Station Aut along with HC Jaspal, H.C Chandermani, Constable Hardev Singh, Daya Ram Pradhan, Charan Dass Patwari, Gokal Chand, B.O Forest, was on patrol duty at a place "Jauli" and going towards Thachadhar. When they proceeded for about some distance, they found cannabis plants sown in five biswas of land in a field. Charan Dass Patwari (PW-1) and Daya Ram Pradhan (PW-6) told the police that Narain Singh had sown the cannabis plants in the land which according to the prosecution was in Khasra No. 796/418. The police plucked the leaves of cannabis in two separate parcels and sealed them with seal ''T'' at nine places each. Investigation proceeded thereafter.

The prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses. Learned Trial Court acquitted the respondent basically on the ground that the provisions of Chapter 10 of the Land Records Manual which contain instructions issued by the Financial Commissioner for the demarcation of land or boundary have not been followed. In State of H.P versus Laxmi Nand & others., (1992) 2 Sim.L.C 307, this Court holds that procedure for demarcation as provided is mandatory and has to be proved on record before any conviction can follow. We do not see any reason to differ from the precedent moreso when criminal liability is sought to be fastened on the accused. The details, in a manner in which the demarcation is carried out, have to be recorded in the demarcation report. Ex. PE is tatima, Ex. PC is jamabandi and PD are copy of gardabri. PW-1 (Charan Dass) has admitted that there are other co-owners in the joint khata. Further, there is no evidence on record to the effect that it was the respondent who was cultivating the land alone and had exclusive control over the land. We also note that Daya Ram (PW-6) Pradhan of Gram Panchayat who was a member of naka party has denied that he ever accompanied the police party but states that documents were prepared in the rest house of Gara? Gusain.

In these circumstances, we find no merit in this appeal, which is dismissed. Bail bonds furnished by the accused are discharged.