( 1 ) THERE is no need to loose much breath on this case. First, a brief resume of the facts and then on to the crucial points.

( 2 ) THE prosecution alleges tlhat oft februny 17, t999 the appellant was found to be in possession of I Kg. and 909 grains of Chars He WM put up on trial and the learned Additional Sessions Judge findil^ him guilty returned a judgment of conviction and an order of senteftce. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order he preferred an appeal (rmn Jail and since he was not represented by a Counsel the Court appointed Mr. R. P. Luthra as an Amicus Curles. Mercifully he has been brief but incisive.

( 3 ) THE first contention of Mr. Luthra is that thetr C. P. S. L. Form was deposited in the Malkhana nor is there any evidence M to where it was kept and that the prosecution has also not proved that it was taken to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory by the Police Officer who had taken the sample parcel to the said Laboratory. He submils that this being the position the benefit of doubt must go to the appellant.

( 4 ). Undoubtedly, Head Constable Yad Ram, Moharrar, Malkhana who has entered the witness box as (Public Witness -7) has no where stated