1. - The appellants Bhanwar Lal and Anandi Lal filed this appeal against the judgment dated January 27, 2004 of Sessions Judge, Baran (Raj.) in Sessions Case No. 152 of 2001 convicting and sentencing them under section 8/15 (b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 to undergo 10 years' RI and pay a fine of Rs. 1.00 lakh each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo Two years' RI.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on July 24, 2001 at 4.10 p.m. Incharge Police Chowki Balunda sent a wire less message to Police Station Mangrole that he has detained two suspects having Poppy husks. On this wireless message Ramprasad (PW.13) Incharge Police Station with police force Ramswarup (HC) Mohammed Ibrahim (FC) (PW.6 Kutubdin (FC) and Abdul Rauf, HC, in Police Jeep started for Police Chowki Balunda where Vijay Kumar (PW.3), Manoj Kumar (PW.4), Shivraj Singh (PW.5) HC Incharge Police Chowki,who were on duty detained two suspects having Poppy husks in two Gunny bags. Constable Richpal Singh vide Ex. P.5 requisition slip sent to Village Baluda to bring two witnesses. On this two witnesses Malkhan (PW.9) and Mangilal, came to Police Chowki Balunda. On reaching these two persons Incharge Police Station informed two suspects that they are to be searched whereupon both these suspects disclosed their names to be Anandilal son of Nandlal and Bhawar lal son of Tulsiram Dhakad resident of Baroda. Both these persons were informed that in Gunny Bags Poppy Husks is kept and the SHO wants to search them. They were asked whether they are ready to be searched by the SHO or before the Gazetted officer. The accused Bhanwar Lal vide Ex. P.16 and accused Andilal vide Ex. 17 made statements in writing that they are ready to be searched by the SHO. Over which both the accused agreed for search by Ram Prasad SHO. In the Gunny bag with Anandilal 5.500 Kgs. Poppy Husks was found and in his pocket Rs. 600/-, one watch, one ring of steel were also found. In the Gunny Bag with accused Bhanwar Lal 5.500 Kgs. Of Poppy Husks was found and in the pocket of Pent Rs. 435 were recovered. The recovery memo Ex. P.1 was prepared. The suspects were not having any licence to sell these Narcotic drugs with them. The suspects were arrested and arrest memos were prepared. As per norms from the recovered material some part of it was sealed separately and sent for chemical examination to the FSL. Accused were arrested vide Ex. P.6 and Ex. P7. FIR was registered at Police Station Mangrole and information about this under section 57 of the NDPS Act was sent to Sessions Judge Baran through Ex. P/14 and to SP Baran through Ex. P.15. Naksa Moka was prepared vide Ex. P.4. Statements of witnesses were recorded and the seized Narcotic Substance was sent to FSL over which receipt Ex. P./3 was given by the FSL and report of FSL was sent to police vide Ex. P.10. After completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the accused appellants under section 8/ 15 (b) NDPS Act, in the court of Sessions Judge, Baran. The Sessions Judge framed charge against the accused appellants under section 8/15 (b) of the NDPS Act. The accused appellants denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses in support of its case and exhibited documents Ex. P.1 to Ex. P.18. The accused appellants were examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. The appellants stated that they have been falsely implicated in the case. After completion of trial, the Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused appellants vide his judgment dated January 27, 2004 as mentioned above.

3. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the accused appellants argued that no offence under section 8/15 (b)of the NDPS Act is made out against the accused on the evidence produced by the prosecution. As per the provisions of section 50 of the NDPS Act, option of the the rights of the accused appellants to be searched by a Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate was not offe