CASE: THE STATE OF NCT. OF.

DELHI
v/s
JAGDEO SINGH @JAGGA ETC. ETC.

PETITIONER The State of NCT. of. Delhi

RESPONDENT Jagdeo Singh @Jagga etc.
S etc.
ACCUSED A1 A2 A3
NAME Jagdeo Singh @ Jagga Gurdeep Singh Sukhwinder
Singh @ Sukhi
U/S.  Section 21 (c) and 29 of  Section 21 (c) and  Section 21 (c)
the Narcotics drugs 29 of the NDPS Act and 29 of the
Psychotropic Substance  Section 489 C and NDPS Act
Act (NDPS) 120 (8) of the Indian  Section 489 C
 Section 489 C and 120 Penal Code ("IPC) and 120 (8) of
(8) of the Indian Penal the Indian
Code ("IPC) Penal Code
 Section 25 of the Arms (IPC)
Act

PUNISHMENT Twelve years of rigorous RI for ten years with RI for fifteen years
GIVEN BY NDPS/ imprisonment (RI) with fine of Rs.1 lakh and and fine of
TRIAL COURT fine of Rs. 1.5 lakh for in default to undergo Rs.1.5 lakh and
each of the offences SI for three months for default to undergo
under Sections 21 and 29 each of the offences SI for six months
of the NDPS Act. under Sections 21 and for the offence
In default to undergo 29 of the. NDPS Act, under Section 29.
simple imprisonment (SI) RI for three years and and 21 (c) of the
for six months and fine of Rs. l0,000 and NDPS Act and
imprisonment for three in default to undergo three years RI and
years with fine of as SI for one month for fine of Rs.10,000
10,000 and in default to each of the offences and in default to
undergo SI for one under section 489-C undergo SI for one
month for each of the and 120-8 IPC month .and for the
offences under Sections offence under
489- C and 120-B 1PC. Section 489-C and
Further seven years RI 120-B IPC.
and fine of Rs. 50,000
and in default to undergo
SI for three months for
the offence under Section
25 of the Arms Act.
DRUG 2KG HEROINE 2KG HEROINE
CONFESTICATE
D

1|Page
 P.S. Special Cell Special Cell Special Cell
FIR NO. No.164 of 2007 at Police No.164 of 2007 at No.164 of 2007 at
Station Sidhwabet Police Station Police Station
18/2007 DATE. Sidhwabet Sidhwabet
23.3.2007 18/2007 DATE. 18/2007 DATE.
23.3.2007 23.3.2007
DATE OF 23.3.2007 23.3.2007 23.3.2007
SEARCH AND Pistol Amount of Rs.2,025/-
SEIZURE One magazine Black colour bag
Eight live cartridges Two packets wrapped
Amount of Rs. 8,740/- yellow colour tape
Polythene bag weighing 1 kg each.
Two packets wrapped in
yellow colour tape were
recovered. They' weighed
at 1 kg each.

WITNESS Inspector Upendra Solanki (PW-17).

Sub-Inspector Harbir Singh (PW-1)
SI Ranbir Singh (PW-4)
Ajay Kumar (PW-10)
HC. Ram Kishan (PW-11)

List of dates:
23.3.2007 Inspector Anil Dureja (PW-16) 2007 arrested Gurdeep Singh Lahoria (A-2),
an active member of the Khalistan Zindabad Force (KZF), who was
smuggling heroin along with his accomplice Jagdeo Singh @ Jagga
(Accused -1) who was going to deliver a consignment at around 7.30 pm to a
Nigerian at Mother Dairy, Pandav Nagar on a Pulsar motorcycle bearing No.
DL 7SAZ 2142.

(PW-16) was accompanied with Harbir Singh (PW-1) SI Ramesh Sharma, SI

Ranbir Singh (PW-4), SI Kishan Lal, Head Constable (HC) Suresh Chand,
HC Ramesh Kumar, Constable Anil Kumar, Constable Ajay Kumar,
Constable Hawa Singh and Constable Om Prakash.

FIR. N0.18/07 was registered dated 23.3.2007 is annexed and marked

ANNEXURE P-1 (PAGE 140-152) PDF PAGE 174-186
they were indulged in the business of drugs, arms and 'ammunitions as well as fake
currency along
04.04.2007 The currency notes were seized by a separate, memo dated 4th April 2007.
Twenty-seven currency notes of RS.10.00 denomination were seized from
the amount recovered from A-1 and two currency notes of Rs.1000
denomination were seized from the amount recovered from A-2, and a FSL

2|Page
 form was prepared in respect of the said seizures.
That the report of the FSL confirmed that the currency notes were counterfeit
and the samples. contained high percentage of diacetylmorphine (DAM).
12.09.2007 That after obtaining sanction under Section 39 of the Arms Act, a charge
sheet was filed on 12th Sept6mber 2007. ANNEXURE P-2 (PAGE 153-
171) PDF PAGE 187-205
2.07.2008 That on 2nd July 2008, an application was filed with the trial court seeking
production warrants for A-3 who had been arrested in FIR No. 77 of 2007
on 26th February 2008.
A-3 was dealing in drugs, illegal arms and fake currency in conspiracy with
A-1 and A-2.
An application was also filed for taking the voice sample of A-1 and A-2 for
comparison with the voice appearing in the intercepted mobile
conversations. However, both A-1 and A-2 declined to give their voice
samples.
20.01.2009 A supplementary charge sheet was filed against A-3 for being in conspiracy
with A-1 and A-2, for supply of drugs, arms and fake currency in Delhi.
ANNEXURE P-3 (PAGE 172-201) PDF PAGE 206-235
13.07.2009 All the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution
examined twenty-nine witnesses to establish its case.
When the evidence was put to the three accused under Section 313 of
Cr.P.C, each of them, denied it and claimed to have been falsely implicated.
21.12.2013 & The judgment/order 21.12.2013 passed by the Learned Special Judge, NDPS
31.01.2014 in S.C. NO. 82 of 2008 ANNEXURE P-4
Patiala House Courts, New Delhi convicted by an order on sentence dated so
30th January 2014. ANNEXURE P-5
2014 Being aggrieved the Respondents / Accused No. l to 3 filed 3 separate
Criminal Appeals No. 527/2014, Criminal Appeal, No. 529/2014 and
Criminal Appeal No. 6.07 of 2014 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at
New Delhi against the judgment /order dated 21.12.2013/ 30.1.2014 passed
by the Learned Special Judge, NDPS, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in
S.C. No. 82/2.003.
11.02.2015 That the Hon'ble High Court vide impugned order dated 11.2.2015 allowed
the Criminal Appeals filed by the Respond/accused persons.
04.2016 Present Special Leave Petition.

JUDGEMENT OF DELHI HIGH COURT (PAGE 1-114) PDF PAGE 36-149

 Each of the above aspects when considered separately may not be sufficient by
themselves to create a doubt about the case of the prosecution, but when viewed in
totality, the prosecution evidence cannot be said to inconsistent with the innocence of the
accused and point unmistakably to their guilt. In other words, the prosecution evidence,
when viewed collectively gives rise to more than a reasonable doubt and the benefit of
that doubt must ensure to the favour of the accused. (PAGE: 112 PARA 112) PDF
PAGE: 147

3|Page
  The Court accordingly sets aside the impugned judgment dated 21 st December 2013 and
order on sentence dated 30th January 2014 passed by the trial Court in SC No. 82 of
2008. (PAGE: 113 PARA 113) PDF PAGE: 148

 The three accused i.e. A-1 Jagdeo Singh, A-2 Gurdeep Singh and A3 Sukhwinder Singh
are acquitted of the offences they have been charged with and directed to be released
forthwith unless wanted in any other case. As far as the present appeals are concerned,
each of the Appellants shall, to the satisfaction of the trial Court, furnish bail bonds in the
sum of Rs. 5000 each with one respective surety of like amount, which shall remain in
force for a period of six months in terms of Section 437A Cr PC. (PAGE: 113 PARA
114) PDF PAGE: 148

THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

SPECIAL. LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO_____ OF 2016
(PAGE 115-) PDF PAGE 150-

QUESTION OF LAW (PAGE 118-120) PDF PAGE 153-155

 Whether Hon'ble High Court. was justified in acquitting the Respondents/accused under
the NDPS, IPC and Arms Act?
 Whether the Hon’ble High Court have not wrongly ignored the lapses and contradictions
in evidences?
 Whether the impugned judgment is not based on assumption and presumptions?
 Whether in the present case one of the crucial evidence was of interception of the mobile
conversations of. the three Respondents and further their call records and their cell 10
positions which are totally ignored by the Hon'ble High Court?
 Whether the hon'ble High Court is correct in passing the impgned order by brushing aside
the aforesaid technical and electronic evidences a the same is not supported by the
Certificate under Section 65B of Evidence Act?
 Whether the Hon'ble High Court is justified in passing the impugned order though in the
present case the parameters set by Hon’ble Supreme Court in State (NCT of Delhi) v.
Navjot Sandhu@ Afsan Guru (2005) 11 SCC 600 has been met during trial?

MAIN PRAYER (PAGE 134) PDF PAGE 169

a) Grant Special Leave to Appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India against the
common Judgment and final order dated 11.02.2015 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of
Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No.527/ 2014, Criminal Appeal No.5.29/ 2014
and. Criminal Appeal No.607 of 2014;

PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIF (PAGE 134-135) PDF PAGE 169-170

b) Grant an ad-interim stay of the operation of the common Judgment and final order dated
11.02.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Appeal
No.527/2014, Criminal Appeal No.529/2014 and. Criminal Appeal No.607 of 2014.

4|Page
 GROUNDS (PAGE 120-133) PDF PAGE 155-168

a) In the present case one of the crucial evidence was of interception of the mobile
conversations of the three Respondent and further their call records and their cell 10
positions. But in the case Anvar PV vs P.K.Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 has brushed
aside the said technical and electronic evidence as the same is not supported by the
Certificate under Section 65B of Evidence Act. (PAGE 121 PARA A) PDF PAGE 156
b) The Hon’ble Court has erred in observing that the compliance of Section 42 and 50 of
NDPS Act has not been done, though the same meticulously undertaken, Further even in
this is a case where recoveries have been affected from the bags being carried by the
accused persons being Gurdeep and Jagdev. (PAGE 121-122 PARA B) PDF PAGE
156-157
c) The Hon’ble Court has further erred in disbelieving the evidence of apprehension of
accused persons from the place of incident. On the basis of minor contradictions. The
Honible Court has wrongly held that the site plan does not show the ‘Gol Chakar’.The
evidence of PW 10 that both the. accused came from Patparganj Side and rest of the
witnesses that they came from Laxmi Nagar Side has been given undue importance by
the Hon’ble Court. (PAGE 122-123 PARA C) PDF PAGE 157-158
d) The Hon’ble court erred in disbelieving all the recoveries in view of the fact that there
was some discrepancy in respect to the fake currency notes being received by the FSL
expert and the consequent opening in the Court. Page 124
e) Error in observing that mobile phones were not recovered from them however, they were
found from their possession only Page 124
f) View point as to torture is incorrect and the arrest was made on 24.03.2007 and not such
averment was made at that time and daily medical check up was being done and none of
the report indicate beatings Page 125 PDF 161
g) Retraction statements are important

PRAYER PAGE-169

ANNEXURE 4

 Prosecution has examined total 29 witnesses in the present case.

PW1 SI, Harbir Singh He narrated the entire incident mentioned above in great Ex.PW1/D,
(Main detail. In his deposition, he confirmed the notices issued to Ex.PW1/A,
Investigating the accused (Gurdeep and Jagdeo), the seizure memos Ex.PW1/E,
official)
prepared with respect to the recovery of the contraband
Ex.PW1/C,
from both the accused persons, the seizure memo prepared
with respect to the recovery of pistol, magazine, cartridges, Ex.PW1/B,

the tehrir prepared at the spot. The report prepared by PW1 Ex.PW1/F,
u/s 57 NDPS Act has also been proved by him. He also

5|Page
 deposed about the surveillance ofthe mobile phone of Ex.PW1/O,
accused Sukhwinder, through which he became aware of Ex.PW1/P,
the conversation between Sukhwinder and accused Jagdeo
Ex.PW1/K
and Gurdeep.
EX.PWI/M
PW2 He deposed that he was handed over the search details of
phone and has proved on the record the search details of
Amit Kumar
the said handset. Ex.PW2/A
(Assistant Nodal
Officer,
Vodafone)
He deposed that he was the duty officer on 23.03.2007 and Ex.PW3/A,
PW3
that on this date he had received the rukka of the present
SI, Kishan Pal E.PW3/B
case through Ct. Ajay and had registered and FIR. He also
(Duty Officer) made an endorsement of the Rukka.

Being a member of the raiding team, he desposed on

PW4
similar lines and have reiterated more or less the assertions
Ex.PW4/B,
SI Ranbir Singh made in the charge-sheet.
(Duty Officer) Ex.PW4/A
PW5
He was posted at PS Special on 23.03.2007 and that on this
date, SHO of the said PS had deposited with him six
HC Mahavir Sing pullandas sealed alongwith the three FSL forms and carbon Ex.PW5/A,
(Official at copy of three seizure memos and that the said property was
Ex.PW5/B,
Special Cell) deposited by him in the malkhana. He also deposed that on
SI Upendra Solanki deposited certain items which were Ex.PW5/C,
taken in possession by him which includes- one Ex. PW5/D
motorcycle, articles of personal search of accused Gurdeep.
Ex.PW5/E
and Jagdeo Singh, two mobile phones from accused
Gurdeep and three mobile phones from accused Jagdeo,
one envelope containing CD’S and DVD’s which have call
recordings of all the three accused, one sealed parcel
containing voice samples of Sukhwinder.

He has deposed the receipt of secret information being

6|Page
PW6 provided by Inspector Anil in the office of ACP, two report
u/s 57 NDPS Act, prepared by SI Harbir Singh were also
Ex.PW6/C,
received in the office of ACP regarding arrest of accused
SI Srinivanas Jagdeo Singh and Sukhwinder Singh and seizure of heroin Ex.PW6/E

(SO to ACP, from them and that said reports were put before ACP.
Special Cell)

He has examined the pistol and cartridges recovered from

the possesion of accused Jagdeo and prepared a report for
the same.
PW7
Dr. K.C Varshney
Ex.PW7/A
He deposed about the deposit of the case property with the
(Expert)
malkhana on various dates and has also proved the relevant
entries thereof in the malkhana register.
PW8
ASI Paramjeet He has proved on record the call recordings pertaining to
Mobile numbers 9871060613 and 9910117964 for the
(Malkhana
period 01.03.2007 to .07.08.2007 and the same have been
Incharge)
PW9 exhibited. He has also placed on record the customer
application form of the mobile- 9876933745
Ex.PW9/A,
R.K Singh
Being a member of the raiding team, he desposed on
Ex.PW9/B
(Nodal Officer) similar lines and have reiterated more or less the assertions
made in the charge-sheet.

PW10 He deposed that on 04.04.2007 on the instructions of

HC Ajay Kumar
Inspector Upendra Solanki, he had taken the exhibits
related to this case vide RC numbers 34/21/2007,
35/21/2007 and 36/ 21/ 2 00.7 and got the same deposited
PW11 with FSL, Rohini and had obtained receipt and handed over
the same to MHC(M). He deposed that so long as the case

7|Page
 HC Ram Kumar property remained with him, it was not tampered with.

He deposed that on 04.04.2007, she had received the 29

currency notes marked as Q1 to Q29 and after examination
opined that the same were counterfeit in nature and thereby
prepared a report for the same.

PW12 Ms. Deepa

Verma
Ex.PW/12
(Assistant
He deposed that on 23.0.3.2007, he was posted as SHO,
Director, FSL)
Special Cell and on that day, Inspector Dureja had
produced before him, 15 sealed pullndas, three FSL Forms
and three carbon copies of Seizure Memo. He put the FIR
number, his initials and his seal 'PNC' on all the pullandas
Insp. Paras Nath
and the FSL form and had then got the said property
PW13
(SHO, Sp. Cell) deposited in the Malkhana by HC Mahavir Singh. He has
further deposed that on the same day, SI Upendra had
produced the accused persons Gurdeep and Jagdeo before
him.

She has proved the report prepared by her with respect to

the analysis conducted by her of the four contraband
samples sent to FSL. As per the said report, the said four,
samples Mark SI, S3, S5 and S7 were found to .contain
monoacetylmorphine, icetylcodeine and high percentage of

Dr. Madhulika diacetylmorphine.

PW14 Sharma
(Assistant Ex.PW14/A
He has proved on record the call details pertaining to
Director, FSL)
mobile numbers 9911328172, 987383607, 9811538286,

8|Page
 9811607709 and 9999579926 for the period 01.03.2007 to
07.08.2007 and the same have been exhibited as well.

Deepak
(Assistant Nodal He has received the secret information and thus proved it
Officer) by DD NO.20. Being a part of the raiding team, he deposed
PW15 on similar lines as has been described in the charge-sheet.

Ex.PW15/A

He deposed that on reaching the spot he had met Inspector Ex.PW15/B

Anil Dureja
PW16 Anil Dureja who had produced before him the documents
(Inspector who prepared by him and the accused persons Jagdeo and
received the Gurdeep. He thereafter prepared the site plan and then
secret info.) interrogated the accused persons and thereafter recorded Ex.PW16/A
the disclosure statements of accused persons and arrested
them. The seizure memos of motor cycle and currency
Insp. Upendra
notes have been prepared him and are proved as exhibits by
Solanki (Second
PW17 PW1. He thereafter deposed about the investigation done
Investigating
by him with respect to accused Sukhwinder on 02.04.2008,
Officer)
he had collected the intercepted mobile conversations that
had taken place among the three accused persons from ST
Harbir Singh in a pen drive and had thereafter downloaded
the said calls in a DVD/CD which have also been duly
exhibited. With the permission of Court he had
interrogated the accused Sukhwinder and had thereafter
recorded his disclosure statement and thus arrested him.
The report prepared by him u/s 57 NDPS Act regarding
arrest of accused Sukhwinder has also been proved by him.

He deposed that the accused Sukhwinder was formally Ex.PW17/A

arrested by the IO and his disclosure statements has been Ex.PW17/B

recorded. He has proved on record the arrest memos as

9|Page
 well as the disclosure statements. Ex.PW17/E

He deposed similar information as that of HC Raj Singh.

HC Raj Singh He deposed about the permission orders granted with

respect to the surveillance of the mobile numbers in
question.
PW18

Ct. Prem Singh Ex.PW18/A

He deposed that he had received a request letter from
ACP, Special Cell regarding collection of voice sample of Ex.PW18/B

PW19 O.P Kelkar accused Sukhwinder Singh and he was deputed for taking
the sample by the head of the division and pursuant thereto,
(Retired Principal
he had collected the voice sample of this accused.
Secretary, GNCT,
PW20
Delhi)

He deposed that he had given sanction u/s 39 of the Arms':

Act after perusing' the police papers and other evidence on Ex.PW20/A,
A.D Tiwari,
record regarding recover of 1 pistol along with 8 live Ex.PW20/B
Senior Scientific
cartridges without license from the possession of accused
PW21 'Officer, CFS
Jagdeo Singh.

He has collected the mobiles phones and SIM cards

Sh. Alok Kumar recovered from the possession of Sukhwinder Singh from
the Police Station of Sidhwa Bet, Patiala. He had handed
(DCP, Spl. Cell)
over the said mobile phones and SIM cards to ACP Ravi
Shankar, IO

PW22 He deposed that on 20/8/ 2007 he along with SI Swarn

Inspector Yugraj Singh, ASI Satnam and other staff had arrested the
accused Sukhwinder Singh in FIR no. 164/07 u/s 21 NDPS.
It has been deposed that from the personal search of

10 | P a g e
 accused Sukhwinder 11 SIM cards and 5 mobiles were
recovered. Seizure Memos have been duly exhibited by
PW23
him.
Inspector Preetam
He deposed that ACP Ravi has deposited the case property
Singh (Incharge
of the case in the Malkhana including one black colored
of Electronic
mobile phone recovered from the accused Sukhwinder. The
Wings, Punjab)
entries of the Malkhana register have been duly exhibited
PW24
by him.

Ex.PW24/A
He deposed about the permission orders granted with

HC Sanjeev respect to the surveillance of the mobile numbers in

question.
(Special Cell)

He deposed about the permission orders granted with

PW25
respect to the surveillance of the mobile numbers in
question. The communications through which the said
permissions were conveyed to the concerned Nodal Ex.PW25/A
Vivek Duggal,
Officers have been duly exhibited by him.
(Secretary, Govt.
of India, Ministry
of Home Affairs)
PW26
Sh, Karnal Singh,
He has proved the report prepared by him with respect to
(Joint Comm. of Ex.PW26/A
the analysis conducted by him of the voice samples of
Police)
accused Sukhwinder. As per the said report, the questioned Ex.PW26/B
voice of accused Sukhwinder tallied with specimen voice Ex.PW26/C
of accused Sukhwinder.
PW27

11 | P a g e
 Rajendra Singh He has produced before the court the call detail records of
the telephone number used by accused Sukhwinder. He has
(Principal Ex.PW27/A
also produced the customer application form, ID proof and
Scientific Officer,
residential proof with respect to the said number and the Ex.PW27/B
CFSL CBI)
details has been supplied to the ACP, Special Cell.

PW28

Ex.PW28/A
A.K Sachdeva,
(Nodal Officer,
Reliance Com.
Ltd.)

PW29

Ex.PW29/A

Ex.PW29/B

Ex.PW29/C

Ex.PW29/D

12 | P a g e
1. Initiation of the raid Page 40
2. Amount recovered Page 43
3. Investigation and charge Page 44
4. Introduction of A3 Page 45-9,11
5. Trial Page 47, denied all allegation
Contentions of A-1:Forcibly picked from Faridabad, contraband was planted, he was in market
with the family when PW1 asked him to accompany him, beaten by police Page 49
6. Denying conversation calls Page 50, denied Delhi FSL asked to take to chandigarh, pending
21 cases page 51
7. Statement of A2 Page 53-Gurdwara sewadar, accused for bomblast,
8. Statement of A3 Page 58
9. Defence Witness-Medical Officer-Beating Page 60
DW 2, Sewaadar Gurudwara Page 61
DW3 Director FSL chadigar page 63
DW 4 nodal officer-Phone details were brought page 64
DW 5-Medical officer tihar jail pg 65, unable to speculate how injuries were obtained
DW6 PS Special cell, duty register destroyed
10. Trial court judgement page 67
-They both knew each other, picking of of motorcycle contradictory staments
11. Contentions of the Appellant Page 79
A1-Site Plan not prepared, PW stating different location from where A1 had approached, No gol
chakkar existed in the site plan as mentioned by PW1
-Difference wrt to time of arrest
-No public witness
-Forged signatures, handwriting expert Page 81/82
-Old transcript conversations
-the contraband was planted and discrepancy in deposition of PW 13 and 16 page 84 ix
-A1 had enmity with Special cell pg 87 xv
12.A2-Page 87
12. A3-Page 89-mobileconversation false and not part of original chargesheet
Read from Page 89
-section 42 is not attracted as not in house
-link of sending the sample
-reports show no discrepancies of location
-medical reports

13 | P a g e
-electronic evidence page 99
-ORIGINAL INTERCEPTED CALLS not received page 106
-req of certificate u/s 64b page 112
-para 74 navjot also not followed
-certificateto be issued by PW 30 page 120
-Case against A3-Page 123
-case against a1and a2 page 125
-Para 43 and 44 of trial court page255/56 and para 46-51 (Page 128)
Section 42 page 129
-supplementRY – TAPPING PHONE CALL
-ORIGINAL CHRGESHEER-INFROMERN ANIL DUREJA
Section 50 page 130
-serving notice, forged sign page 132
-evidence of torture page 135 (trial court did not consider) para102
Para 56 of trial court judgement- page304/104-Page 140 discrepancy regarding location
-Doubtful recoveries page 142 PW 17 cross examination
-key of motorcycle page 111

List of witnesses Page 168/202 and 200/234

Conversation Page 183/217
List of DOcumentd 166/200

OG Chargesheet 154/188
Supplementary- 178/212

14 | P a g e