Ashutosh Kumar, J.—Heard Ms. Surya Nilambri, the learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, the learned APP for the State.

2. We have been very ably assisted by Ms. Surya Nilambri, the learned Amicus.

3. The sole appellant stands convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) read with Section 29 of the N.D.P.S Act, 1985 and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 14 years, to pay fine of Rs. One Lakh and in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for six months.

4. The appellant stood charged under Section 20(b) (c)(ii)/29 and 23C with the aid of Section 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. However, at the trial, he was not convicted for the offence under Section 20(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act. For Section 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, no punishment has been awarded to him.

5. On the self statement of PW5 /Amitesh Kumar, who at the relevant time was S.H.O. Palanwa police station in the district of East Champaran, a case vide Palanwa P.S. Case No. 86/12 dated 29.07.2012 was registered for the offences under Sections 20(b), 22, 23 and 24 of the N.D.P.S. Act. In his self statement, PW5 has alleged that on 29.07.2012, he secretly learnt at about 9.30 A.M. that some persons are coming from Nepal with contraband. This information was entered in the Station Diary and a raiding team was constituted and a picket was posted at the relevant place. At about 10 ‘O’ Clock in the day, a Pulsar motorcycle was spotted and the riders, seeing the police party, tried to flee away. The pillion rider, who was carrying a bag containing the narcotics threw the bag and also tried to flee away but was nabbed by the police party. The person driving the motorcycle, namely, the appellant was also arrested. In front of two villagers available, namely, Sagir Miyan (PW6) and Hriday Sharma (PW7), search was conducted on the person of the appellant and the co-accused. The bag which was thrown by the pillion rider by the name of Rajiv Ranjan, who later was sent to Juvenile Justice Board for determination of his guilt, was found to be containing 49 packets of 500 grams each of Charas. The total weight of the seized narcotics was 24.5 Kgs. On a plain assessment of the narcotics, it was found to be Charas. Mobile telephones in possession of the accused persons, were also seized. No paper with respect to the ownership of the motorcycle which was being driven by the appellant could be produced before the raiding team. Both the arrested accused persons disclosed before PW5 that they in the past also had brought narcotics from Nepal and had taken it to Delhi for being sold in the market. This time also, they were carrying the narcotics for it to be taken to Delhi for sale.

6. After investigation, chargesheet was submitted and the appellant was put on trial.

7. The Trial Court, after having examined seven witnesses on behalf of the prosecution and none on behalf of the defence, convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.

8. Mr. S.P. Tiwary and Ms. Surya Nilambri have submitted that the evidence against the appellant in this case is absolutely weak. In support of the aforesaid contention, it has been urged that mandatory provisions under the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, namely, Sections 42A, 50, 52, 52A and 54 read with 55 have not been followed. The standing instruction numbers 1/88 and 1/89 have been completely flouted and the sampling has not been done in accordance with the mandate. In fact, the sampling has not at all been done at the place of raid. The seized narcotic was straightaway taken to police malkhana where it was kept without any inventory having been made or any entry made in the malkhana register for about two months. It was only thereafter that a requisition was was made before the learned District Judge for deputing a Magistrate for drawing the sample in the malkhana. The samples so drawn thereafter was dispatched to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) at Patna on 06.09.2012 through a constable/special messenger who has not been examined at t