A. Lekshmikutty, J.

1. Against the judgment in SC No. 32 of 1997 on the file of the Court of the First Additional Sessions Judge, Kozhikode, the appellant/accused filed this appeal. The appellant was charged under S.21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "the NDPS Act"). He was found guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. One lakh, in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year more.

2. The prosecution case is that on 12.9.1996 at about 4.45 P.M., PW 1, the then Additional Sub Inspector of Police, Nadakkavu Police Station got reliable information that a lady wearing white doted sari and red blouse carrying brown sugar and proceeding from West Hill side to Beach road side. He informed the Woman Police Station to send a Woman Constable. The information which he received was informed to the Circle Inspector of Police and then obtained the written authorization from him. Thereafter, he proceeded to the scene with police party. When they reached West Hill near Hydrogenation factory junction, PW 1 saw the accused going through the southern side of the road with a blue plastic bag in her hand. On seeing the police party, the accused tried to walk speedily and tried to conceal the plastic bag. The police party stopped the vehicle and told her that they suspect contraband article in her possession and they want to search her body. Before search, she was informed that she is having a right to be searched before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. But she replied that she does not want to be searched in the presence of any Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. So, PW 5, Ammukutty, H.C., Vanitha Police Station, Kozhikode conducted the search of the body of the accused in the presence of witnesses and recovered the plastic bag from her. On verification of the same, 149 small packets were seen in the plastic bag. On examination of the packets, it was found as brown sugar. The accused was arrested and the contraband article was seized in the presence of the witnesses. On weighment of the packets, it was found as 25 gms. The recovered article was packed and sealed and the signature of the accused as well as the witnesses were obtained on the packets. MO 1 is the brown paper used for packing the packets. The brown sugar received after analysis is MO 1(a) series. MO 2 is the Mathrubhumi paper covered by the brown paper. MO 3 is the plastic cover. Ext. P1 is the seizure mahazar prepared by PW 1, the Additional Sub Inspector of Police. Ext. P2 is the First Information statement and Ext. P3 is the FIR registered on the basis of Ext P2. After complying with the formalities, charge was framed against the accused for the offence punishable under S.21 of the NDPS Act. The same was read over and explained to the accused to which she pleaded not guilty. To prove the prosecution case, the prosecution examined PWs. 1 to 8 and marked Exts. P1 to P11. MOs. 1 to 3 were also marked. On the side of the defence, no oral evidence was adduced, but Ext. D1 was marked. The court below after evaluation of the evidence found the appellant guilty of the offence and convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-. In default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another one year. Against the said judgment of the lower court, this appeal is filed by the convict.

3. Heard both sides.

4. The point for consideration is whether there is any reasonable ground to interfere with the judgment passed by the lower court. The allegation against the appellant is that she had possessed 25 gms. of brown sugar in 149 small packets and the same was recovered by PW 5 as per the direction of PW 1. The accused was found by the southern side of the road near Hydrogenation factory junction near Bangladesh Colony within the jurisdiction of Nadakkavu Police Station. The said allegation