The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for meticulous adherence to the legal mandates of the ND&PS Act, particularly regarding the authorization of officers for search, seizure, and arrest, and the consequences of non-compliance.

1. Heard Mr. C. Lalfakzuala, the learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. A.K. Rokhum, the learned Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

2. By filing this appeal, the appellant has challenged the Judgment & Order dated 28.02.2018 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court under the ND&PS Act at Aizawl in Criminal Trial No. 115/2016 whereby, the appellant was convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (ND&PS Act) and sentenced to a rigorous imprisonment for 5 years with a fine of Rs. 5000/- and with a default clause.

3. Assailing the order of conviction and sentence, Mr. C. Lalfakzuala, the learned counsel submits that the appellant could not have been convicted and sentenced by the learned Trial Court, inasmuch as, the entire investigation right from the seizure of the alleged material suspected to be Ganja up to the filing of the charge sheet is vitiated by multiple defects and short comings. The learned counsel by referring to the FIR submitted by one Mr. Saingura Sailo, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Saitual Police Station submits that upon receiving a telephonic information from Wing Commander of Khawlian 2nd Indian Reserve Battalion Post, the Officer concerned rushed to the Khawlian 2nd Indian Reserve Battalion Post and apprehended the appellant along with 16 kgs of material suspected to be Ganja from his possession. According to the Officer concerned, the materials were seized from the appellant and it was packed in the presence of reliable witnesses. The learned counsel submits that as per the provisions of Sections 42 and 43 of the ND&PS Act, only the Authorized Officer mentioned therein would be empowered to make such seizure and arrest. He further refers to the Notification dated 06.10.2015 issued by the Excise & Narcotics Department, Government of Mizoram vide Memo No. J.24011/1/2010-EXC to contend that Officers of the rank of Sub-Inspector and above in the Excise & Narcotics Department and the Police Department are empowered to make the arrest and seizure in terms of Section 41(2) of the ND&PS Act. However, in the instant case, the arrest and seizure was made by the Assistant Sub- Inspector of Police who was neither empowered nor authorized.

4. The learned counsel further submits that the Seizing Officer was examined as PW-1 by the prosecution and in his examination-in-chief, he deposed that on 18.11.2015, he received a telephonic information from the Wing Commander, Khawlian 2nd Indian Reserve Battalion (2nd I.R. Bn.) Post, that they had detained the appellant whom they believe to possess material suspected to be Ganja. Therefore, he along with other Police personnel’s rushed to Khawlian after recording grounds of believe. Upon reaching the spot and in the presence of two local independent witnesses from Khawlian, he checked the belongings of the appellant and recovered one gunny bag. Upon opening the said bag, he found some material suspected to be Ganja inside it and he therefore seized the same in the presence of the two civilian witnesses. On measuring the weight of the material suspected to be Ganja, it was found to be 16 Kgs. Samples was then drawn and the same was packed and sealed in the presence of the appellant and the civilian witnesses. In his cross examination, PW-1 deposed that at the relevant time the Sub-Inspector posted in the Police Station concerned was on leave and out of Station and that, the Officer-in-charge also was out of station. Being the only Officer in the Police Station, he had to conduct the search and seizure. From his deposition, Mr. C. Lalfakzuala, the learned counsel submits that it can be seen that it was he who conducted the search, seizure and arrest of the appellant although he was not authorized. He further submits that the contention of PW-1 that he being the only Officer present at Saitual Police Station, he had to conduct the search and seizure cannot be a ground to undertake such search