The reliability of testimonies, corroboration of evidence, and the sufficiency of evidence to establish possession of contraband under the NDPS Act.

1. The present appeal has been preferred by appellant/Santosh Rani under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( hereinafter referred as “CrPC”) against the impugned judgment dated 19.09.2011 and order on sentence dated 10.10.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Rohini Courts, Delhi, in case FIR No. 86/2008 registered at Police Station -Narcotics Branch, New Delhi, whereby the appellant had been found guilty for possession of 10kg 200grams of Opium, which is punishable under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “NDPS Act”) and has been sentenced rigorous imprisonment of ten years and a fine of Rs.1 Lac, and in default of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

2. The case of the prosecution as observed by the Trial Court is that:-

“2. ................ on 08.08.2008 at about 11.30 PM, a secret informer came to ASI Paramjit Singh in the Narcotics Cell and informed him that a lady namely Santosh Rani, a resident of Uttam Nagar, Delhi who is involved in the business of supplying opium in whole sale, would come today in her Black Colour Santro Car bearing No. DL 4CR 5279 between 1.30 PM to 2.30 PM on the way leading to Bhalsava dairy to supply opium and if raid is conducted, she could be apprehended with opium. On receipt of this information, ASI Paramjit Singh produced the secret informer before Ins. M.L. Sharma- SHO, PS Narcotics Branch, who after satisfying himself, informed ACP (N&CP) Sh. Mahinder Singh Dabas on telephone and thereafter Ins. M.L.Sharma directed ASI Paramjit Singh to conduct the raid. Secret information was reduced into writing. On the direction of senior officer, ASI Paramjit Singh constituted a raiding party comprising himself, HC Rani Reddy, HC Kanwal Singh and Ct. Charan Singh. Raiding Team along with secret informer reached the spot. Public persons were requested to join the raiding party, but none agreed. After some time, accused Santosh Rani and her son Rishi reached the spot in black colour Santro Car bearing no. DL-4CR-5279 and after two minutes thereof, another accused Gurmeet Kaur also reached there. From the spot itself, accused persons Santosh, Rishi and Gurmeet Kaur were apprehended. From the possession of accused Santosh Rani, 10 kg. 200 grams opium was recovered. Mandatory provisions of NDPS Act were compiled with. Samples were taken. FSL form was filled in. All the three accused were arrested. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet against the accused was filed in the court. The copies were supplied. After recording the disclosure statement of these three accused persons, police also came to know that accused Puran was also involved in the commission of offence. On 18.02.2009, accused Puran surrendered in the court and he was arrested. Thereafter, a supplementary charge sheet against accused Puran Chand was filed in the court. The copies were supplied. Accused Santosh Rani and Gurmeet Kaur were charged for the offence punishable u/s 18 NDPS Act. Accused Rishi was charged for the offence punishable u/s 25 NDPS Act and accused Puran Chand was charged for the offence punishable u/s 29 NDPS Act. The charges were read over and explained to the accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.”

3. To bring home the guilt of the accused persons, the prosecution has examined as many as ten witnesses and got exhibited certain documents. Statement of the accused person was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1983, wherein they reiterated their innocence. The accused Santosh Rani examined one witness in her defence being DW-1 Satish Kumar.

4. Mr. S. S. Das, learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the Trial Court has not properly appreciated and considered the material available on record and has erroneously recorded the findings of conviction and therefore the same is liable to be set aside. He further contended that there wer