Judgment

S. RAJENDRA BABU, J.

( 1 ) ). The original appellant Vinod being no more, his legal representatives are pursuing this appeal to vindicate his honour and also to obviate the obligation arising out of levy of substantial amount of fine upon the original appellant apart from sentence of imprisonment in respect of an offence arising under Section 21 read with Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Therefore, the application for substitution is allowed.

( 2 ) ). The charge against the original appellant is that on 2-10-1991 at about 2. 40 p. m. near Shukla Lodge, Bajaria, Telipura he was found to be in possession of brown sugar weighing 120 mg valued at Rs 120 meant for sale without licence, permit or authorisation.

( 3 ) ). The evidence put forth in the course of trial before the learned sessions Judge is in the shape of Exhibit 39 complaint and Exhibit 38 panchnama supported by the evidence of PW 7 Head Constable Bapu Bhosle. Apart from this material there was no other material to show that the appellant was in possession of the said brown sugar. The trial court noticed that both in the complaint and in the panchnama it was mentioned that prior