Hon'ble SHARMA, J.—The appellant-accused has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.9.2012 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 46/2010 whereby appellant-accused was convicted for the offence under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in default of payment whereof, to further undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 4.6.2010, at about 3.45 a.m., Shri Dalpat Singh, S.H.O., P.S., Bijoliya, received an information from mukhbir that one white coloured Bolero Vehicle, No. RJ 21 UA 1553, which was being driven by Rajuram with three other persons wen tto M.P. and will return from the same way with Doda Post and if they would not be caught, they will dispose of the same. Thereater, on compliance of the provisions of Section 42(1) of the NDPS Act, the said information was reduced in writing in the roznamcha and copy of the same was sent to S.P. Bhilwara, Additional S.P., Bhilwara and C.O., Circle Mandalgarh, Bhilwara in compliance of the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act through Constable Vijay Singh on 4.6.2010. Thereafter he with his police team, Head Constable Roduram, Constable Arvind Kumar, Madanlal, Prahlad Kumar, Onkar Singh on his Government Jeep No. RJ 21 U 0880 with driver Naval Singh proceeded towards Singoli Ghata along with investigation box, petromex etc. and after reaching there, they started nakabandi. During nakabandi, at about 4.55 a.m. one jeep was been driven on high speed which was stopped. On seeing police party, three persons ran away and one person who was driving the jeep also tried to fled away but he was caught and the rest three persons were tried to be caught but they ran away. The person who was cauht, on asking, told his name as Raju @ Rajuram Jat. Thereafter, he as given notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act on which he agreed to be searched by the S.H.O.. Thereafter, on search, 11 bags were found in the vehicle containing 245.500 kgs. doda post and found, which were seized and sealed after taking samples. The vehicle was also seized. The appellant-accused was thereafter arrested and F.I.R. No. 94/2010 was registered for the offence under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act and investigation commenced. On investigation, it was found that the vehicle was stolen vehicle and for that an F.I.R. No. 115/2010 under Section 379 I.P.C. was also found to be registered. Thereafter, on completion of investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the appellant-accused for the offences under Sec. 8/15 of the NDPS Act and Secs. 411 and 476 IPC. After hearing, the learned trial Court framed charges against the appellant-accused for the aforesaid offences to which he denied and claimed trial.

3. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited documents. Thereafter, the appellant-accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he denied he prosecution case and stated that he has been implicated falsely.

4. After trial, the learned trial Court, vide the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.9.2012, convicted and sentenced the appellant-accused as aforesaid. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order, the appellant-accused has preferred this appeal, which was admitted for hearing by this Court vide order dated 22.11.2012 and record of the trial Court was called for.

5. I have heard Mr. D.S. Beniwal, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. L.R. Upadhyay, learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the prosecution has failed to assign any reason for not obtaining search warrant and thus there is total non-compliance of the provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act, which vitiates the trial. It was also submitted by him that the vehicle from which the alleged rec