JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, Customs. Mr. B. Sarma, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appears for the State respondents.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 27.04.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, Nalbari in NDPS Case No.4/2011 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. By the impugned judgment, the trial court has convicted the appellant and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for 7(seven) years and to pay a fine of Rs.70,000/-, in default of payment of fine, he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.

3. On 29.08.2011 at about 9.45 A.M., the appellant (Abdul Hai) and Salim Miya were searched near Daulasal Natun Chowk Bazar and recovered 190 grams of brown sugar from their possession. The other person Salim Miya was a juvenile. Therefore, his case was referred to appropriate authority.

4. In order to prove the offence against the appellant, the prosecution side has examined 12(twelve) witnesses. The appellant did not examine any witnesses.

5. On the basis of the evidence on record, the trial court passed the impugned judgment.

6. I have carefully gone through the prosecution evidence.

7. The first witness to be examined is J.K. Saikia. He was the Superintendent of Customs. He has stated in his evidence that on 29.08.2011, Inspector Ridip Hazarika (PW-2) had seized 190 grams of brown sugar from the possession of the appellant and another person called Salim Miya at Daulasal Natun Chowk Bazar. The witness has stated that two packets containing 5 grams each were prepared as samples. Both the appellant and Salim Miya were brought to Guwahati and their statements were recorded. The witness has further stated that the chemical report in respect of the samples was found positive for heroine.

8. In his cross-examination, J.K. Saikia has stated that he lodged the FIR against the appellant and the Salim Miya. He has further stated that at the relevant time of occurrence, he was standing at a distance of about 100 meters and therefore, he was not sure as to from whose possession the narcotic drugs was seized.

9. The second witness is Ridip Hazarika. He has stated that on 29.08.2011 at about 9.45 A.M., he noticed that two persons were walking by the side of the road at Daulasal Natun Chowk Bazar. Ridip Hazarika has stated that both the persons were searched and from their possession, one black colour polythene bag containing narcotic drugs was seized from the present appellant.

10. Ridip Hazarika has stated in his cross-examination that though the narcotic drugs was recovered at Daulasal Natun Chowk Bazar, it was not formally seized there.

11. The third witness is Pradip Kr. Dey. He is an Inspector of Customs. He has stated in his evidence that on 29.08.2011, he was at Daulasal Natun Chowk Bazar. He has disclosed that he noticed a huge public gathering and thought that something must have happened to his colleague officers. This witness has stated that he subsequently learnt that his colleague officers recovered brown sugar from the appellant and Salim Miya.

12. Pradip Kr. Dey has stated in his cross-examination that at the time of seizure of narcotic drugs, his team was not present at the place of occurrence and therefore, he was not sure exactly from whom the narcotic drugs was seized.

13. The fourth prosecution witness is Alok Kr. Singh. He is an Inspector of Customs Department. He has stated in his evidence that on 29.08.2011, he accompanied PW-1 J.K. Saikia and PW-3 Pradip Kr. Dey. The witness has stated that on that day, Ridip Hazarika had informed J.K. Saikia over phone that he has recovered suspected brown sugar from two persons. On hearing that news, this witness along with J.K. Saikia came to Daulasal Police Out Post. The witness Alok Kr. Singh has stated that on reaching there, he came to know that 190 grams of suspected narcotic brown sugar were seized from two persons.

14. In his