JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal is filed by the accused-appellant against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge (Prl. Sessions Judge), Belgaum in Special Case No. 47/2007 by order dated 25.06.2010.

2. The learned Judge by the above stated judgment imposed sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- for commission of the offence under Section 20(1)(i) read with Section 8(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, in default, accused shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months.

3. The brief facts for the purpose of the appeal are on 05.07.2005, the PW-10 the PSI, Chikkodi Police Station, Chikkodi received credible information that the accused had grown ganja plants in his land bearing R.S. No. 36/4/1 of Mamadapur K.K. and that PW-10 communicated the information to his superiors and he secured panchas and also the gazzetted officers. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer and witness and Officers went to see the land of the accused where they found 9 ganja plants grown in the midst sugarcane crop. The said plants were plucked and removed from the ground. They were seized under a mahazar in the presence of panchas and said Gazetted Officer viz. PW-1. They weighed the said ganja and were found to weigh 1 kg 115 grams. Out of them sample plant weighing 300 grams was separately packed for the purpose of forensic analysis and the bulk plaints were separately packed and were sealed. Thereafter, a complaint came to be registered against the appellant-accused.

4. The accused was produced before the Special Judge on 6.7.2005 at 4.45 p.m. with remand application and he was remanded to judicial custody. The accused was granted bail on 25.07.2005.

5. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge under Section 20(a)(1) read with Section 8(b) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 and read over to the accused. The accused has pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.

6. The learned Sessions Judge after holding the trial convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Section 20(a)(1) read with Section 8(b) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction the accused has filed the present appeal on the following grounds:

The learned Session Judge has passed the judgment on the basis of assumption not on the basis of the evidence available on record that has led to miscarriage of justice. There is no application of judicious mind. The material witnesses PW-8 and 11 have not supported the case of the prosecution with regard to the seizure of the cannabis plant. The witnesses have not knowing even the contents of panchanama. The Trial Court committed error in believing the PW-1 a lady medical officer who is said to have visited the scene of offence along with the raiding party. As a Government Servant she has left the hospital on duty hours without mentioning anything in the movement register. Requisition given to her also not endorsed. The neighboring land owners PWs. 4 to 7 have not at all supported the case of the prosecution. They have not at all seen the MOs.1 and 2 ganja plants grown in the scene of offence. There is no material evidence on record to prove that the accused himself has grown the same. It is an admitted fact that the land in question is cultivated by the brother of the accused. The Trial Court has misconstrued this fact. The search, seizure and arrest of the accused have not been done in accordance with the provisions of NDPS Act. Therefore, entire investigation is highly illegal. The Trial court committed error in placing the reliance on the official witnesses.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that section 55 of the NDPS Act has not been followed. There is an inordinate delay in sending the sample for FSL examination. The Malkhana Register for having kept the seized property has not been maintained or produced. Only fruiting, flowering tops of the ganja plants has to be raid, instead of entire ganja plan