The prosecution must comply with mandatory procedures for seizure and sampling under the NDPS Act, and failure to do so undermines the conviction.

JUDGMENT :

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)

This appeal has been preferred by the appellants/convicts under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) challenging the judgment of conviction dated 06.12.2017 and order of sentence dated 13.12.2017 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Trial No. 74 of 2016 (arising out of D.R.I. Case No. 05 of 2015), whereby the concerned Trial Court has convicted the appellant/convict for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) (ii) (c) and 23 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘NDPS’) and they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-and in default of payment of fine, further undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) (ii) (c) of the NDPS Act and rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-and in default of payment of fine, further undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Section 23 (c) of the NDPS Act. All aforesaid sentences ordered to run concurrently.

2. The case of prosecution as speaks through complaint petition (D.R.I. Case No. 05 of 2015), lodged by the complainant namely Ashutosh Kumar/P.W. 1 alleging therein interaliathat on 13.07.2015 at about 6:40 PM, he alongwith other Police/SSB personnels intercepted a white colour Mahindra Varieto Car coming from Darbhanga side, in which a male and a female were present and on interception, person driving the car disclosed himself as the appellant no. 2, while the lady sitting therein disclosed her name as appellant no. 1 and on search of the dicky, some packets were found filled with ganja, a narcotic substance. Accordingly, seizure list pertaining to all 38 packets of ganja weighing 200 kilograms was prepared and sample from each packet, after mixing up in two packets each of 24 grams, were prepared and marked with seal.

3. On the basis of aforesaid complaint, the police registered a case as D.R.I. Case No. 5 of 2015 dated 22.12.2015 for the offence under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c) and 23(c) of the NDPS Act, where after the investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet.

4. The learned Sessions Judge, being Court of original jurisdiction after perusal of record and materials collected during the course of investigation, took cognizance for the offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c) and 23(c) of the NDPS Act and transferred this case to the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur for trial and disposal.

5. The learned trial court on the basis of materials collected during investigation, framed charges against both appellants/convict on 19.02.2016 for the offences under Sections 20 and 23 of the NDPS Act 1985, which they pleaded “not guilty” and claimed trial.

6. To substantiate its case, the prosecution has examined altogether six witnesses. They are:-

7. Apart from the oral evidence, the prosecution has also relied upon following documents/exhibits in order to prove the charges:-

8. On the basis of evidence as surfaced during the trial, the learned trial court has examined the appellants/accused under Section 313 of the Code, where they completely denied their involvement by denying the incriminating evidences surfaced during the trial and stated that they were implicated with this case falsely and claimed their innocence.

9. No witness was examined by ap