These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 5th April, 2002 of the Special Judge for trial of N.D.P.S.Act cases, Thiruvananthapuram. The appellants were charged with the offences punishable under Section 8 (c) read with Sections 21, 27A, 28 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotripic Substances Act. After the trial the learned Special Judge found all the accused guilty of the offence under Section 21 of the N.D.P.S.Act and convicted them. They were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years each and also to pay a fine of Rs.one lakh each; in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each. The 1st accused is the appellant in Crl.A.No.339/2002 and the 2nd and 3rd accused are the appellants in Jai Appeal Nos.1635/2003 and 1634/2003 respectively.

2. The prosecution case is as follows: on 14-11-2000 at about 4 p.m. P.W.5, the intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau, received reliable information that accused 1 and 2 have checked in room No.115 of the Dwaraka Lodge at Moonnukallinmoodu of Neyyattinkara, Thiruvananthapuram, with one kilogram of brown sugar for the purpose of sale. He reduced the information into writing and gave Ext.P13 (the information recorded) to P.W.6, the Superintendent, N.C.B. After obtaining permission from P.W.6, P.W.5 along with P.Ws. 6 and 7 proceeded to the Dwaraka Lodge. Accused 1 and 2 were found in room No.115 of the lodge. A search was conducted in room No.115 in the presence of P.W.1, the Watchman of the lodge, and a witness by name of Peethambaran, who was the proprietor of a readymade shop situated near to the lodge. The search thus conducted by P.W.5 resulted in the seizure of one kilogram of brown sugar kept in a black leather bag, M.O.3 (a). Two samples were taken weighing 5 grams each from the seized powder and they were separately sealed and packed. The remaining powder was also sealed in the polythene packet. In the presence of accused 1 and 2 and the other witnesses P.W.5 prepared Ext.P1 mahazar and got the same signed by accused Nos.1 and 2. P.W.5 served Exts.P14 and P15 summons under Section 67 of the N.D.P.S. Act to accused 1 and 2 and directed them to appear for interrogation on he next day at 11 a.m. before the office of the Narcotic Control; Bureau, Thiruvananthapuram. In obedience to the summons accused 1 and 2 appeared in the office of the N.C.B. Thiruvananthapuram and gave Exts.P7 and P16 statements respectively. Immediately thereafter P.W.5 arrested accused 1 and 2. On the basis of the information furnished in Exts.P7 and P16 statements that accused 1 and 2 got narcotic drug for sale from the 3rd accused, P.W.5 directed P.W.7 to serve summons on the 3rd accused. On 15-11-2000 P.W.5 served Ext.P26 summons on the 3rd accused at Madurai directing him to appear before him on 16-11-2000. When the 3rd accused appeared, P.W.7 recorded Ext.P9 statement given by him. Immediately thereafter accused No.3 was arrested by P.W.5. Subsequent investigation was conducted by P.W.7, who after completing the investigation laid the complaint before the lower court.

3. The accused denied the charge. Thereupon the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 7, marked Exts.P1 to P27 and identified M.Os.1 to 4(a). The defence examined three witnesses as D.Ws.1 to 3 and marked Exts.D1 and D2. On an elaborate consideration of the evidence brought on record, the learned Special Judge found the accused guilty of the offence, convicted them and sentenced them as stated earlier.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants strongly contended that as no quantitative test was conducted in this case, it cannot be said that the seized contraband was heroin as defined under the N.D.P.S. Act. It is also contended that the Intelligence Officers, who conducted the search and seizure in this case and filed the compliant were not duly authorized to do so since there was nothing on record to show that they were holding the rank of Inspectors or above in the departme