S.P.GARG, J.

1. Challenge in this appeal is a judgment dated 22.09.2012 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.09A/08 by which the appellant – Mohammad Burhan was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 21(c) and 29 of Narcotic Drug and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short ‘NDPS Act’). By an order dated 25.09.2012, he was sentenced to undergo RI for ten years with fine Rs.1 lac each under Sections 21(c) and 29 of NDPS Act. The sentences were to operate concurrently.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the complaint was that on 17.08.2007 at about 05.00 p.m. Kamal Kumar, Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (in short ‘DRI’) received a secret information on phone that two persons of the given description would arrive at Yamuna Vihar Bus Stop on Wazirabad road at about 09.00 p.m. by a U.P. Roadways bus bearing registration No. UP 14M 6752 and they were in possession of narcotic drug in a shoulder bag. This information was recorded in writing (Ex.PW-2/A) and placed before senior officers. Complainant – Jyothimon Dethan was directed to take necessary steps.

3. Further prosecution case is that a raiding team was constituted and two public persons were called at the spot at about 08.30 p.m. to join the investigation. At around 08.45 p.m. the raiding team noticed two persons matching with the description given in the information (Ex.PW-2/A) alighting from the U.P. Roadways bus. When the individuals were trying to hail a pedal rickshaw, they were apprehended and introduced to the members of the raiding team and the panch witnesses. One of them was the appellant and the other one was Arif Butt – a Pakistani National (since Proclaimed Offender). They were informed about the secret information regarding narcotic drug in their shoulder bags. Since the spot was not conducive for thorough examination, they were taken to DRI office at D-Block, 7th Floor, I.P. Bhawan, I.P. Estate, New Delhi. Notices under Section 50 of the NDPS Act (Ex.PW-10A & Ex.PW-10/B) were served upon them. On search of the red and black colour shoulder bag carried by the appellant six polythene packets were found; these contained heroin. On weighing, its gross weight was 6.318 kg. and the net weight came to be 6.026 kg. On search of the bag carried by Arif Butt, Rs.50,000/-were recovered; two bus tickets were also recovered in the personal search of the accused Arif Butt. All these articles were seized and a panchnama was prepared after conducting necessary proceedings. During investigation, statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. The appellant and his associate -Arif Butt were arrested; they recorded their statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act. Upon completion of investigation, a complaint case was filed against the appellant and his associate -Arif Butt. It is relevant to note that during pendency of the trial, Arif Butt defaulted in appearance and finally he was declared Proclaimed Offender vide order dated 05.08.2010.

4. To establish its case, the prosecution examined total fourteen witnesses. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the appellant denied involvement in the crime and pleaded false implication. The trial resulted in conviction as aforesaid. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant urged that the Trial Court did not appreciate the evidence in its true and proper perspective and fell into grave error to base conviction on the sole testimony of PW-10 (Jyothimon Dethan). No independent public witness was produced for examination to corroborate his version. The appellant was falsely implicated in this case and nothing was recovered from his possession. Learned counsel for DRI urged that there are no valid reasons to disbelieve the testimonies of the police officials who had no prior animosity with the appellant to falsely implicate him in the crime. The huge recovery