JUDGMENT

We have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

2. The accused-appellant has been convicted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the NDPS Act) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of ten years. The conviction and sentence has been affirmed in appeal.

3. As the appeal has been argued on merits despite the fact that the accused has served the period of sentence, we have considered the matter in great detail.

4. We have perused the judgment of the trial Court as well as the High Court, the evidence of the main witnesses of the prosecution and also the documents exhibited in the course of the trial. What emerges from a consideration of the evidence on record is that apart from the oral testimony of PW-7 (Dharambir Singh, Sub-Inspector) to the effect that the case property was deposited in the Malkhana and it was also produced in Court, there is no documentary evidence to the said effect. In fact, PW-7 in his cross- examination, had admitted that the bags of poppy-husk has not been produced in Court and that he had not obtained the signature of the Malkhana In-charge at the time of the alleged deposit