Dalveer Bhandari, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the Judgment of Mr. V. S. Aggarwal. Additional Sessions Judge dated 3rd August, 1992 by which the appellant was convicted under Section 20 of the N. D. P. S. Act and was sentenced to undergo R. I. for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh. In default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to undergo further R. I. for 2 years. The present case pertains to an incident of 25th August, 1987. S. I. Dharam Pal was posted at New Delhi Railway Police Station. At that time. Assistant Sub Inspector Prem Narain was also with him. He received secret information that one person had arrived via Vaishali Express and is at platform no. 4 and 5 near Tea stall no. 8. He was reported to be in possession of Charas. This information was recorded in Daily Diary no. 8.

( 2 ) IMMEDIATELY thereafter, a raiding party was organised in which ASI Prem Narain and Constable Vajinder Singh joined and they rushed to the above-mentioned platform via plotform no. 4. One Lalit, a public witness also joined in raiding party. S. I. Dharam Pal at the pointing out of the informer near the Tea stall apprehended the accused. The accused was holding a brief case in his right hand. He was told about the secret information.

( 3 ) THE accused appellant was told that if he likes his person can be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate in compliance of Section 50 of the N. D. P. S. Act. But he declined. A memo to that effect was prepared. The appellant gave the key of the brief-case and the same was seized. The officer-in-charge of the Police Station, Inspector Jai Narain was requested to come to the spot. The brief-case was opened and it was found to contain 10 packets of charas lying under the card-board. The contents were weighed and each packet was weighed and found to be of half a kilogram. They were all numbered 1 to 10 and in each packet 15 grams was taken as the samples and the rest of the charas were converted into different parcels with the seal of "jn" and seized vide a recovery memo. The accused was arrested by another memo.

( 4 ) THE CFSL form was filled and SI Dharam Pal sent the rukka to the police station on the basis of which formal FIR was recorded by ASI Jaimal Singh. The case property was deposited in the Malkhana. Head Constable Bhim Singh effected the entry at serial no. 1311. Later, the samples were sent to CFSL through Constable Vajinder Singh. On receipt of the report that the contents were charas, a challan against the accused was filed. On 5th December, 1987, a charge was framed against the accused for an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution examined 7 witnesses in all in support of its case.

( 5 ) LEARNED Additional Sessions Judge on the basis of prosecution evidence and documents on record, found the accused guilty of Section 20 of N. D. P. S. Act and convicted him for the said offence. It is submitted that the accused was arrested on 25th August, 1987 and since then he is in jail. Learned counsel for the appellant has attacked the prosecution case primarily on the ground that the accused/appellant cannot be convicted on the basis of CFSL Report given by Mr. C. L. Bansal, Senior Scientific Assistant (Chemistry, Central Forensic Science Laboratory), Central Bureau of Investigation, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that Mr. Bansal is not an officer covered by Section 293 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thus, the report submitted by him is riot admissible in evidence in absence of the aforesaid officer being examined in court.

( 6 ) THE submission of the learned counsel is that under Section 293 (4) (e) of the Code, the officials named are: the Director, Deputy Director, and Assistant Director of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory ). If the report is given by any of these officers, then it is per se a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document