( 1 ) HEARD the learned additional Public Prosecutor. This criminal appeal is preferred as against the judgment recording acquittal in S. C. No. 55 of 1999 on the file of the Special Judge for trial of cases under N. D. P. S. Act.

( 2 ) THE learned Additional Public prosecutor would submit that the evidence of P. W. I is available and Ex. P. 4, the report received from the analyst stating that the samples were mixed with diazopam was also made available and hence, this material is sufficient to arrive at a conclusion that the offences with which the accused had been charged with section 22 of the N. D. P. S. Act, 1985 and section 37 of the A. P. Excise Act, 1968 had been proved.

( 3 ) THIS matter is coming up for admission.

( 4 ) THE facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondent-accused is the president of T. C. S. Inamadugu and looking after the affairs of the T. C. S. Inamadugu, kovur Mandal, Nellore District. It is also the case of the prosecution that on 8-1-1999 at 10-45 a. m. P. W. I, the Prohibition and excise Inspector went with her staff to the scene of offence shop and while inspecting the said toddy shop, found the President in the shop doing toddy business. He was keeping 15 litres white plastic can and she deputed M. Ramakrishnaiah, A. P. S. P. No. 1022 to secure mediators and after sometime, he returned and informed as nobody to act as mediators. Then, the Excise inspector verified the plastic can and found it containing 10 litres of toddy in it and she had taken samples from the said toddy into three 180 ml. capacity bottles for the purpose of analysis, sealed the sample bottles, affixed identity slips to them and-seized them under a cover of special report drafted by N. Durga Prasad, A. P. S. P. No. 145 8 and she registered the above special report as a case in P. R. No. 131/98-99 under Rule 24 of A. P. Excise (Arrack and Toddy Licences General Conditions) rules, 1969 and sent the property and connected record to the learned Additional judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kovur. One of the sample bottles had been sent to the Government Chemical Examiner, Guntur for analysis through the learned Additional judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kovur and after analysis, the analyst opined vide Chemical Examination Report No. 194/ 98-99, dated 19-2-1999 as the sample is sl. No. 2131 is toddy free from chloral hydrate but mixed with diazopam . Then, she altered the section of law into section 37 (1) of the A. P. Excise Act read with 8 (c) and 22 of N. D. P. S. Act, 1985 and filed a memo to that effect before the court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of first Class, Kovur. The Prohibition and excise Inspector, Kovur took up investigation in the case and concluded as respondent/ accused was selling toddy in the T. C. S. shop of Inamadugu and she arrested the accused and produced him before the additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class court, Kovur and filed charge-sheet as against the accused.

( 5 ) THE learned Judge had recorded the evidence of P. W. I and Exs. P. l to P. 4 were marked. P. W. I is the Prohibition and excise Inspector. Ex. P. l is the Special report. Ex. P. 2 is the First Information report. Ex. P. 3 is the letter of advice filed by P. W. 1 to send the sample bottle to chemical Examiner. Ex. P. 4 is the Chemical analysis Report. The defence is one of total denial. The learned Judge, in Paras 8 and 9 had recorded reasons and ultimately, acquitted the accused of all the charges. The learned Judge observed that the prosecution had failed to establish that the accused was President of T. C. S. Shop. The learned Judge also had taken note of the fact that there are Village Sarpanch, Village elders and several others of the Village but none had been examined and at least, the person who was sent for the purpose of securing the mediators also had not been examined. Apart from this aspect of the matter, the learned Judge also had specifically recorded that Rule 24-A of the A. P.