The prosecution must establish a prima facie case beyond reasonable doubt under the NDPS Act, and discrepancies in evidence do not automatically invalidate a conviction if foundational facts are proven.

Judgment :

(S.K. Medhi, J.)

The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [corresponding to Section 415 BNSS] against the judgment and sentence dated 30.09.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, Bongaigaon in Special (Nar) Case No. 46(BGN)/2021 under Section 20(C) of the NDPS Act, thereby sentencing the appellant to undergo RI for 12 (Twelve) years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) in default further imprisonment for 6(six) months.

2. The criminal law was set into motion by registering a GD Entry No. 685 dated 21.05.2021 by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Bongaigaon Police Station (PW5). As per the said entry which was recorded at 6:50 PM, it was stated that secret information was received regarding storage of contraband ganja. A raid was accordingly made at about 08:00 PM in which 25.563 KGs of ganja were seized. On 22.05.2021, the formal FIR was lodged by the said PW5 in which there was full narration of the facts and the GD entry was also mentioned. After investigation, the Charge Sheet was laid before the learned Trial Court. The charges were thereafter, framed and on denial of the same, the trial had begun in which the prosecution had adduced evidence through 9 nos. of witnesses. There was also a Court Witness (CW) who was a Police Officer.

3. PW1 is an independent witness who was also a seizure witness. He had deposed that on 21.05.2021 at about 9:00 PM, he was at a shop near his house when the Police had arrived and asked him to show the house of the appellant. He had also named one Pradip Burman (PW2) who was also present with him and the house of the appellant was shown. In the cross- examination, however, PW1 had stated that he did not see from where the Police had seized the ganja and he had not seen the seized ganja in the Court on the date of his examination. He has also stated that the ganja was not weighed in his presence. He had admitted before the Police that he did not state that the appellant was involved in ganja business.

4. PW2 is another independent witness who had corroborated the presence of PW1 and deposed of showing the house of the appellant to the Police. He had stated that he was witness to the seizure of the ganja from a shed behind the house of the appellant which had weighed about 25 KGs. He had, however, stated in his cross-examination that he had not seen from where the Police had recovered the ganja, had not seen the ganja in the Court nor had he seen the Police measuring the ganja.

5. PW3 is a co-villager whose evidence is not very relevant as he had come to know about the incident from someone else. Similarly, PW4 is also a co-villager who is a hearsay witness and had stated that he came to know about the incident from somebody else.

6. PW5 is a relevant witness who is the informant in the present case. He had stated that on the way to make the search, the independent witnesses were approached and at about 08:00 PM they had entered the premises of the appellant when the wife of the appellant had informed that the appellant was not at home. He had also stated that an authority letter was given to make the said search and the said authority letter was proved as Exhibit 3. He had stated about recovering ganja of an amount of 25.563 KGs which were seized from 9 packets in an adjacent room in the backside of the house and one yellow cement bag containing suspected ganja from the garage which was kept inside a spare tyre. The recovered suspected ganja were brought to the front courtyard of the house of the appellant and each packet was weighed in present of the DSP (HQhhJHHSSHQ) and O/C, Bongaigaon which was found to be 25.563 KGs and the seizure list was accordingly made which was proved as Exhibit 1. The recovered suspected ganja were unloaded from the 10 packets to 3 new polythene bags which were again weighed and sealed and the signatures of the independent witnesses were taken. At 09:40 PM they had left the place of occurrence an