JUDGMENT :

Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.

1. The appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated December 08, 2021 and order of sentence dated December 10, 2021, passed by learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Alipore, South 24 Parganas in connection with Sessions Trail No. 3(1) of 2018 arising out of Sessions Case No. 1 (9) Of 2017.

2. By the Impugned Judgement of Conviction, the appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 20 (b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. By the impugned order of sentence, all the three appellants were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 12 years and to pay a fine of Rupees one lakh and in default of payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for a further period of six months.

3. On May 31, 2017, one Dababrata Sikder, sub-inspector, ADRS, DD, lodged a written complaint with the officer-in-charge of Taratala PS to the effect that on May 31, 2017 at about 14.30 hours, he received a credible source information that male persons would be coming to sell/supply charas in Taratala PS area in the afternoon. The information was reduced into writing and forwarded to the officer in charge ADRS, DD. Upon due permission, a raiding team was formed at about 15. 00 hours. The de facto complainant along with the raiding team left the office at Lalbazar for the spot along with the raiding team, source, weighing scale, narcotic drug testing kits, packing materials and other accessories.

4. The raiding team reached near Hi-Tech centre, Hi-Tech Logistics Ltd. on 1/1 Taratala Road at about 16. 30 hours. The source led the raiding team to the spot where they started maintaining watch. At about 17. 00 hours, the source pointed out towards male persons who were coming along Taratala Road. The de facto complainant detained the aforesaid three persons with the help of the raiding team on the road in front of Hi-Tech Centre and disclosed his identity and the purpose of their detention. Meanwhile, a small crowd gathered. The de facto complainant requested them to be a witness to the search and seizure. Two persons from the crowd volunteered to stand witness.

5. Upon interrogation, the three detained persons disclosed their identity as the appellants. Thereafter, the de facto complainant served written option to the detained persons informing their legal right to be searched in presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. The detained persons were also explained the implication of the words Magistrate and Gazetted Officer. The detained persons agreed to be searched on the spot in presence of a Gazetted Officer and refused to go anywhere else. A search for Gazetted Officer was made in the locality but could not be found. The de facto complainant informed his superior officer whereupon, at about 19.00 hours, Inspector Tapan Kumar Mandal, additional officer-in-charge, Taratala PS came to the spot in uniform. He was introduced as a Gazetted Officer to the detained persons and the witnesses.

6. The said Gazetted Officer served the second option in writing upon the detained persons whereupon they reiterated to be searched at the spot in presence of a Gazetted Officer. The detained persons agreed to search the person of the searching officer and the raiding team and upon such search, nothing objectionable could be found.

7. Thereafter, the de facto complainant proceeded to search the detainees. One black coloured bulletin packet from the right hand of the appellant Hazrat Ali Molla, which was found to contain five pieces of solid materials of cannabis resin commonly called charas having the characteristic smell of charas weighing about 356 grams and cash of Rs. 110/- from his chest pocket was recovered. On search of the appellant, Susanta Sarkar, a black coloured polythene packet was found in his right hand containing nine pieces of solid materials of cannabis resin commonly known as charas having the characteristic smell of charas weighing about 565 gm and cash of Rs. 12