Sitting on Bags of Poppy Husk: Supreme Court Upholds Woman's NDPS Conviction, Finds Conscious Possession

A police patrol in Punjab found the appellant sitting on two bags by the road; on seeing the police she turned towards her village and, when asked, said the bags held poppy husk (para 2). At her request she was searched before a DSP and a lady officer, and the bags held about 60 kg of poppy husk (para 2). The trial court on 20.02.1999 convicted her under Section 15 and imposed the minimum ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1 lakh, and the High Court dismissed her appeal on 15.05.2008 (paras 1, 3-4). She alleged police bias, no independent witness, breach of Sections 52 and 57, delay in sending samples and no conscious possession (para 6).

Her statement that the bags held poppy husk was not challenged in cross-examination, and the bags were carried by her (para 7). As the recovery was from bags, the plea under Sections 52 to 57 was baseless, and Section 50, which applies only to a search of the person, was not attracted, following Baldev Singh and Maniram (paras 8, 12). Following Madan Lal, conscious possession turns on the facts: she sat on the bags, behaved suspiciously, no one else was present, and she herself said what they held (paras 9-10). Her earlier anticipatory bail application and a fruitless raid on her house did not show bias (para 10). Her complaints about the purpose of the search and the grounds of arrest were technical, since she knew why she was searched and showed no prejudice (para 11). Following Hardip Singh, the short gap before the samples reached the chemical examiner was not fatal, and the only independent witness had been won over and examined by the defence (para 13).