Adherence to the mandatory provisions and safeguards designed to ensure the authenticity of the material upon which a conviction is based is crucial in establishing a valid conviction under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

Appellant stands convicted of the offence under S.21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (called "the Act" hereinafter), on a charge that he was found in possession of 5 grams of brown sugar (diacetyl morphine) at or about 6 p.m. on 17-9-1988 at Chakkumkadavu by P.W.1, Head Constable. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years, and to a fine of Rs.1 lakh, with a default sentence of two years. The court below relied on the evidence of P. Ws. 1,2,5,6 & 7 to find the charge.

2. P.W.1 would say that he found the appellant under suspicious circumstances, that he accosted him, that he searched his person, and that he recovered 5 gms of brown sugar under Ext.P1. He took one gram from this, divided it into two parts and produced the balance before court as MO1. P.W.2 another Head Constable, speaks on the same lines. According to him, one gram of brown sugar was divided into two parts as samples. P. W.6, a third Head Constable, states that he conducted the investigation, while P. W.7 Sub Inspector states that he "verified" the investigation. According to P.W.8, a clerk of the Magistrate's Court, each of the sample bottles contained one gram of brown sugar (Ext.P10 certificate). Appellant denied the charge.

3. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that the conviction is vitiated for the reason that the mandatory provisions of Ss.50,52,53,55 & 57 of the Act, were violated. Elaborating the contention, he submitted that the investigation was made by an officer, lower in rank than the officer named inS.53, that the samples were not sealed, and that the other safeguards in the Act were breached. He submitted further, that the evidence is unreliable and that a conviction cannot be based on such.

4. The plain language of Ss.50, 52, 53, 55, 56 & 57 of the Act, leave no doubt, that these are mandatory provisions. But, violation of a mandatory provision per-se, will not vitiate the conviction, unless prejudice thereby to the accused is shown. But, a mandatory provision is not meant to be violated by those, who are expected to adhere to the mandate.

5. Whether prejudice has resulted to the accused has to be ascertained from the circumstances of each case. If basic safeguards designed to ensure the authenticity of the material, upon which a conviction is based, are violated that will be prejudice, in law.

6. The existence of contemporaneous records, the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate during search, prompt sealing of samples and expeditious reports to superior officers are some of the safeguards postulated by the legislature, to ensure the veracity of the evidence, upon which conviction is sought. In cases of this nature, search and seizure go a long way, in establishing the charge. The offence could be visited with imprisonment for a period of 20 years, which could be the best years of life of a person. He cannot be deprived of the cherished right of liberty, unless there are valid reasons therefor. A conviction can be entered only on unimpeachable evidence. Elaborate safeguards are made in the Act to insure this. S.50 of the Act requires a person to be taken to a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, if he so desires. S.53 incorporates another safeguard, to ensure that investigation is made only by a responsible official, who could be trusted with functions, which may have far-reaching consequences. S.55, likewise, is another important safeguard, to ensure the identity of the article seized. Likewise, expeditious report of arrest and seizure to a superior officer, contemplated by S.57 is another safeguard to vouch for the correctness of the allegations upon which a charge is rested.

7. There could be no doubt that the offences sought to be punished under the Act, make a serious impact on the quality of life in a society. Narcotics and psychotropic substances, condemn a person to a worthless life and a slow death. Trade in narcotics has attained a pride of place, even in international trade.