JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 11.06.2018, passed by the learned Special Judge (NDPS) Act, West Sessions Division at Bomdila in NDPS Case No. 01/2017, under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and order, dated 11.06.2018, the learned Court below has convicted the accused appellant under Section 20 (B) of the NDPS Act and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 (ten) years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh) only, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another 6 (six) months and further, it is provided that the detention period, underwent during investigation and trial, is to be set off as per provision of law.

2. The factual background, leading to filing of the present petition, is briefly stated as under:

“On 15.12.2016, SI/GD Neeraj Kr. Sharma, I/C ‘C’ Coy, 4200 chain, 61st BN, SSB, B/Kunda, Assam, launched special operation in the AOR of ‘C’ Coy 4200 chain. During the operation, they found some group of persons in the forest carrying Ganja Bags on their head and when the SSB team called them to stop; they ran away by throwing their bags towards the hilly side. They could apprehend one of them, namely, Shri Swarangsa Bosumatary, S/o Shri Santosh Bosumatary of Dhimachang Village, PO-Patakpur, PS-Mazbat, Distt. Udalguri, Assam, and seized 10 Kgs of Ganja and Rs. 11,000/-of Indian currency note from his possession at about 21.15 hrs., and handed him over to the Officer-in-Charge, Balemu Police Station and lodged one FIR on 16.12.2016. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer-In-Charge Balemu Police Station, West Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh, registered Balemu P.S. Case No. 16/2016, under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act and he investigated the same. During investigation, he has visited the place of occurrence, examined the witnesses and seized the Ganja and Rs. 11,000/-Indian currency note on being produced at the Police Station by the complainant, Neeraj Kr. Sharma, in presence of witnesses. He, then, drawn up sample from the seized Ganja and forwarded one of the sample to the FSL for examination. He also arrested the accused, Shri Swarangsa Bosumatary, and forwarded him to the Court. He then collected the FSL Report and on completion of investigation and having found prima facie case against the appellant, laid Charge-Sheet before the Court to stand trial under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act. Accordingly, the appellant appeared before the learned Court below. Then hearing learned Advocates of both sides, and considering the materials available on record and the Case Diary, the learned Court below has framed charge against the appellant under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act and on being read and explained over, the appellant pleaded not guilty to the same. Thereafter, the learned Court below has examined as many as 6 (six) witnesses and after closing the prosecution witnesses, the learned Court below has examined the appellant under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. and, thereafter, hearing arguments the learned Advocates of both sides and having found the charge proved, convicted the appellant under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act and sentenced him, as aforesaid.”

3. Then, being highly aggrieved, the appellant preferred this Appeal on the following grounds:

(i) That, the learned Court below convicted the appellant without any legal evidence against him;

(ii) That, though the prosecution side has examined as many as 6 (six) witnesses, yet, out of those witnesses, none of them could identify the appellant in the Court;

(iii) That, the search and seizure was not made in presence of gazetted officer as required under Section 50 of the NDPS Act; and

(iv) That, the FSL expert has not been examined here in this case to prove the FSL report;

(v) That, the Investigating Officer has failed to weigh the seized cannabis and sample of which is not produced before the Court at the time of trial and, therefore, it is contended to