The reliability of the evidence provided by police officials, compliance with procedural requirements under the NDPS Act, and the absence of tampering with seized contraband are crucial factors in determining the outcome of a case under the NDPS Act.

Indermeet Kaur, J.

1. These appeals are directed against the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 31.10.2011 wherein appellants Daya Shankar Gupta and Sanjay Shah stood convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act (in short NDPS Act). Each of them had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for a period of 6 months. Benefit of Section 428 of the Cr.PC had been granted to the convicts.

2. Nominal rolls of the appellants reflect that as on date, each of them has undergone incarceration of 6 years and 4 months; remission being inapplicable to a convict under the NDPS Act.

3. The version of the prosecution is that pursuant to a secret information received on 07.07.2009 (reduced into writing and forwarded to its senior officer), a raiding party was constituted comprising of PW-3 (HC Sanjiv Kumar), PW-6 (HC Kanwal Singh) and PW-10 (SI Bhagwan Singh). They reached the spot i.e. bus stand Seema Puri bus depot opposite the bus depot, via Pushta Road, Gandhi Nagar, G.T. Karnal Road. 5-6 passersby were asked to join the raid but none had agreed. The members of the raiding party were briefed about the secret information which was to the effect that two persons would be coming through that way carrying huge quantities of contraband. Nakabandi was done. At the pointing out by the secret informer, the accused persons who were seen at a distance of 6-7 meters were apprehended. They were holding red-white and green bags respectively in their left hand. The person holding the green bag was identified as Daya Shankar and the person holding the red white bag was Sanjay Shah. PW-10 introduced himself to the accused. The secret information was also disclosed to them. It was informed to them that they had a right to get themselves searched either in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate and a notice in writing under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was served upon them. On the search of the accused, the green coloured bag was found to contain a while blue coloured check-dar cloth which contained slabs with a khakhi coloured tape; they were 12 in number. There was a black coloured substance and on testing it with the field testing kit, it tested positive for charas. It was weighed on an electronic scale; it weighed 6 kgs. Two samples of 50 gms each were taken from this quantity of charas and they were separately seized and sealed. The remaining contraband was also seized and sealed. From the search of accused Sanjay Shah who was carrying a red white coloured bag, a blue coloured cloth sheet was found in the bag which also contained slabs wrapped in a khakhi coloured tape; they were also 12 in number. This was also a black coloured substance and on testing it with a field testing kit it also tested positive for charas. It was also weighed on an electronic scale and measured 6 kgs. Two samples of 50 gms each were also taken from this quantity of charas and they were separately seized and sealed. The remaining contraband was also seized. The disclosure statements of the accused was recorded. The case property was handed over to the MHCM HC Chand Ram (PW-8) who deposited it in the malkhana on the same day through Inspector Akshay Kumar (PW-5). The sealed sample along with the FSL form was sent to the CFSL on 22.07.2009 through HC Narender (PW-7). The samples after testing, tested positive for charas. Compliance of Section 57 of the NDPS Act was also made.

4. In the statement of the accused recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.PC, they pleaded innocence; submission being that they had been lifted from the bus stop and this case has been falsely planted upon them. No evidence was led in defence.

5. On the basis of the aforenoted evidence, both oral and documentary, the accused were convicted and sentenced as aforenoted.

6. On behalf of the appellants, arguments have been addressed by Mr. Arvind Kumar.