JUDGMENT :

PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment of conviction dated 28.04.2016 and order of sentence dated 30.04.2016 passed in Trial No. 39 of 2014 corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No. 12 of 2014 arising out of Sathi P.S. Case No. 121 of 2014 whereby and whereunder the sole appellant has been convicted under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B), 22(b) and 23(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as the N.D.P.S. Act) and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- for each of the offence and in case of default of payment of fine, to further undergo imprisonment for one year for each default.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 07.07.2014 at about 16:00 hours, informant, namely Dhirendra Nath Verma, received secret information that two persons are going to Sathi Railway Station on a motorcycle with Ganja. Upon receiving the information, a raiding team was prepared and the same reached near Sathi Bazar Railway Station and at about 18:15 hours, two persons were seen coming from Sathi Bazar to Railway Station and on suspicion, they were asked to stop, however, they started fleeing but were caught eventually. Upon enquiry, they disclosed their names as Parama Sah (appellant) and Arvind Kumar Sharma and on search, some substance was found in a polythene kept in a gunny bag and this appellant disclosed that the said article was Ganja and was brought from Nepal. Accordingly, seizure was made in presence of two witnesses, namely Suresh Thakur and Hari Sah and along with the contraband, one mobile phone and a SIM card were seized from possession of this appellant and one mobile phone, a SIM card, 40 rupees cash and motorcycle were seized from possession of co-accused Arvind Kumar Sharma.

4. The seized articles were produced with the accused persons to Sathi Police Station and accordingly, Sathi P.S. Case No. 121 of 2014 was registered. In this case, charge-sheet was submitted on 11.10.2014 under Sections 20, 22, 23, 24, 27 and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act and thereafter, cognizance was taken and charges were framed on 22.05.2015 under Sections 20(b)(ii)B, 22(b) and 23(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

5. In this case, in order to bring home guilt of the accused person, the prosecution has examined altogether seven witnesses. P.W. 3, namely Dhirendra Nath Verma is informant of this case and member of the raiding team. P.W. 1, namely Nagendra Sahani; P.W. 2, namey Rahul Kumar; P.W. 4, namely Anil Sharma and P.W. 5, namely Vivekanand Singh, are members of the raiding team. P.W. 6, namely Rajesh Kumar Jha, is the Investigating Officer of the case. P.W. 7, namely Awadhesh Kumar, is incharge of the Malkhana. On the other hand, the defence has not produced any oral or documentary evidence.

6 After hearing the parties, the learned trial court convicted the appellant and sentenced him as indicated in the opening paragraph of this order.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant assails the order of conviction and sentence on various grounds. He contends that in this case, there has been total violation of Sections 42, 52A and 55 of the N.D.P.S. Act. He contends that in this case, the police officer did not record the information at all and did not inform the the officer superior to him at all thus, is a clear violation of Section 42 of the Act. The prosecution could not prove drawing of the so called samples in presence of the Magistrate and also in presence of the appellant. The seized articles were neither sealed at the spot nor it was sealed while keeping the same in Malkhana and as such, production of the material exhibit does not prove that it was the same article which was alleged to have been seized in the alleged occurrence and from the possession of this appellant. Thus, the prosecution also failed to prove the preparation of inventory in view of