N.A. Britto, J.-These appeals are filed by the accused who have been convicted and sentenced under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, ('Act' for short), by Judgment/Order dated 7.7.2004 of the Special Judge, Mapusa, Goa. The said accused were prosecuted after a complaint was filed by Shri Vaz, Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise/PW 4, with the allegation that on 23.2.2001, at about 18.30 hours, both of them while travelling on a motorcycle from Margao towards Panaji, were found in possession of 8.5 kgs hashish valued at about Rs. 20,00,000. In the course of the trial, the complainant examined himself/PW 4 and five more witnesses.

2. The case of the accused was that they were falsely implicated. As per A-1/Satyawan Pagi, in his statement separately filed after recording his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, A-1/Satyawan Pagi, was in the precincts of the Margao bus stand, when some persons grabbed him, put him in a jeep and took him to a building in Margao, where he was questioned for hours and was threatened and assaulted and forced to put his signature on various documents. A-1/Satyawan Page denied having confessed to the possession of the charas and about knowing A-2/Vimal Singh previously. As per A-2/Vimal Singh, who chose to give his evidence as DW 1, he stated that he was proceeding from Vasco da Gama to Margao, at about 10.00 hours and that there was mechanical failure to the bus he was travelling and since it was not known how much time would be taken for the repair of the said bus, he asked the driver about the distance and was told that it was about three kilometers, which he thought, he would cover on foot and as he was walking towards Margao bus stand, with a view to keep his appointment at about 11.30 hours, he found that a private vehicle had stopped by his side. who caught hold of him on either side and forced him in the vehicle and then he was taken and confined to a room and was questioned about the persons to whom he had sold drugs and he told them that he did not know to which persons they were referring to nor did he know the persons who were referred to by them and. on c the next morning, at about 10.00 hours, he was made to sign some blank papers upon a representation that the signatures were being taken to the effect that he would not come back to Goa. A-2/Vimal Singh, stated that he had not given any statement to the said persons in connection with this case. When he was examined, he stated that he was not produced before any Magistrate until 27.2.2001.

3. Considering the evidence produced on behalf of the Complainant and that of A-2/Vimal Singh, the learned Special Judge came to the conclusion that the evidence of the complainant was duly b corroborated by the panch witness and PW 5/Inspector Cruz and the same established the complainant's case as regards the recovery of the stated quantity of hashish from the two accused. The learned Special Judge also came to the conclusion that the statements recorded under Section 67 of the Act, were voluntary and which come in aid to further establish the case against the accused and. by the examination of PW 2/Fatima Noronha, Warehouse Officer, the complainant had established safe deposit of the sealed packages on 24.2.2001, thereby ruling out any possibility of tampering and that by examination of PW 6/Lillian Fernandes, it was established that the sealed packages were indeed deposited on 24.2.2001, being a Saturday, in view of the Circular issued by the Ministry of Finance, to keep the offices open till 31.3.2001, and last but not the least, by the examination of PW 1/Mahesh Kaissare, the Scientific Officer, the complainant had established that the representative sample as well as the remnant quantity was tested positive for hashish.

4. It would be advantageous to refer to the evidence of the complainant Shri Vaz/PW 4, without minor details, in order to appreciate the other