JUDGMENT

Sanjay Karol, J.—Assailing the judgment dated 26.12.2007, passed by the learned Special Judge, Fast Track Court, Kullu, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 25/2007, titled as State of H.P. vs. Jagdish Chand, whereby respondent-accused stands acquitted, State has filed the present appeal under the provisions of Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. It is the case of prosecution that on 8.12.2006 SILal Singh (PW-5) along with HC-Sher Singh (PW-3), Constable Khem Singh (PW-4), Constable Ugam Singh and Lady Constable Meena Kumari (both not examined in court) had gone to village Jhana in connection with investigation of F.I.R. No. 169 of 2006. At about 4.30 p.m. they saw accused came from the opposite direction. Seeing the police party, he tried to flee away. On suspicion he was chased and was over powered. Initially accused was carrying a polythene envelop in his hand, which after seeing the police party, he concealed it in the pocket of his coat. Accused was searched and packet was taken out from the pocket from which charas in the shape of chapattis and balls was recovered. Same was weighed and found to be 1.750 k.g. Constable Ugam Singh was asked to search for independent witnesses, but since none were available, SI-Lal Singh associated HC-Sher Singh (PW-3) and Const. Ugam Singh for carrying out the seizure operations. Two samples of 25 grams each were separated and sealed with five seals of seal impression-T. NCB form in triplicate was filled up on the spot. Ruka (Ext. PN) was sent through Constable Khem Singh (PW-4) for registration of the case. On the basis of ruka, Inspector-Sanjay Kumar Sharma (PW-2), SHO, Police Station Manali registered F.I.R. No. 307/2006 (Ext. PG), dated 8.12.2006, against the accused under the provisions of Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). With the completion of necessary investigation on the spot, SI-Lal Singh arrested the accused and thereafter deposited the contraband substance along with seized property with Inspector Sanjay Kumar (PW-2) who affixed his seal impression-M on the samples which were deposited with MHC-Pinki Devi (PW-1). She sent the sample for chemical analysis to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory at Chandiarh through constable Mohinder Pal (PW-8). Report (Ext. PJ) was obtained by the police. With the completion of investigation, which revealed complicity of the accused in the alleged crime, challan was presented in the Court for trial.

3. Accused was charged for having committed an offence punishable under the provisions of Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial.

4. In order to prove its case, in all, prosecution examined eight witnesses and statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr. P.C. was also recorded, in which he pleaded innocence and false implication. No evidence in defence was led by the accused.

5. Court below acquitted the accused for the reason that prosecution could not prove its case, beyond reasonable doubt. Hence the present appeal.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties as also perused the record, we are of the considered view that in the instant case no ground for interference is made out. Court below has correctly and completely appreciated the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, as also other material placed on record. We find material illegalities which havebeen committed by the police while carrying out the search and seizure operations. Witnesses HC-Sher Singh (PW-3), Constable Khem Singh (PW-4) and SI-Lal Singh (PW-5) admit that recovery was effected from the person of the accused. It is not a case of chance recovery. Seeing the police party accused tried to flee away. He was appended and on suspicion searched. Now in the instant case SI-Lal Singh (PW-5) did not issue any notice in writing, as is mandatorily required under law, of informing the accused of his rig