Strict adherence to procedural requirements in the NDPS Act is essential for securing convictions; failure to follow these mandates can lead to acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

Ramesh Sinha, C.J.

1. Since the above-captioned appeals have arisen out of one and same judgment dated 14.02.2023 passed in Special Criminal Case (NDPS Act) No. H-16/2020 by the learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Mahasamund (C.G.) and since common question of fact and law is involved in both the appeals, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. These criminal appeals preferred under Section 374(2) of the CrPC are directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.02.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Mahasamund (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case (NDPS Act) No. H-16/2020 by which the appellants have been convicted for offences punishable under Section 20 (b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 15 years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each, in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year.

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 25.07.2020, Assistant Sub Inspector Sushil Sharma of Police Station Komakhan received information from the informer that 02 persons in a white colored pickup were traveling from Orissa to Chhattisgarh. On the information that they were carrying psychotropic substances, after giving notices under Section 160 CrPC vide Ex.P-1 to Kanhaiya Lal Dhiwar and vide Ex.P- 24 to Mukesh Yadav for confirmation of the information and after registering it in the Rojnamcha Sanha and without duly preparing the Informer Information Panchnama (Ex.P-2) and Without Warrant Search panchnama (Ex.P-3), along with accompanying staff and witnesses, reached the spot and set up a blockade. During the blockade, a white color Pickup Vehicle Bolero Maxi Truck Plus Number U.P. 81 BT 0712 coming from Orissa side was stopped in which two persons were found. On being interrogated, the driver revealed his name as Rajkumar Sharma and the person sitting next to him revealed his name as Madan Mohan Sharma. On being asked what was in the sack kept in his vehicle and where were they coming from, they told that they were carrying ganja from Muniguda (Orissa) to Aligarh (Uttar Pradesh). After given notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act to the accused for search vide Ex.P-4 their consent was taken vide Ex.P-5. After searching of police party vide Ex.P-6 and witnesses vide Ex.P-7, Search Panchnama was prepared vide Ex.P-8.

4. On searching the said vehicle Bolero Maxi Truck Plus No. U.P. 81 BT0712 and after finding 34 packets wrapped in brown colored polythene in 03 sacks, totaling 100 kg of intoxicant like ganja, Recovery Panchnama was prepared vide Ex.P-9. In the presence of witnesses, illegal narcotic substances like ganja recovered from the vehicle jointly owned by the accused were mixed together, some quantity of it was rubbed, smelled, sniffed and burnt and it was found that it contained narcotic substances and Identification Panchnama was prepared vide Ex.P-10. Notice under Section 91 CrPC was given to the accused vide Ex.P-11 for producing documents in relation to said contraband articles. The substance was found to be marijuana. Notice to weigher (taulkarta) Jitendra Dhiwar was given vide Ex.P-22, his statement was recorded vide Ex.P-23. Thereafter, on