R.L. Khurana, J.—The present appeal through Jail has been preferred by the appellant, hereinafter referred to as the accused, against the judgment dated 5.11.1998 passed by the learned Special Judge (Sessions Judge), Solan, in Case No. l-S/7 of 1998 whereby the accused has been convicted of the offence under Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short: the Act) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. one lakh. In default of payment of fine, the accused has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a further period of one year.

2. The prosecution story, briefly, may be stated thus. On 17.3.1997 PW 13, ASI Pushap Lata, Incharge Traffic Solan, while on duty at a crossing received secret information that a person of particular description/was coming in a bus from Nahan carrying "Charas". A report about this was got recorded by her at Police Post City, Solan. She then associated PW-12 ASI Chaman Lai and Constable Rakesh Kumar and Dalip Singh. They posted themselves at the road crossing in front of the office of Deputy Commissioner, Solan. At about 10 a.m. or 10.30 a.m. a HRTC bus from Habban arrived and stopped at the bus stand near the crossing where the buses usually stop. The police party closed the back door of the bus. Passengers were allowed to alight only from the front door. The person of the given description namely, the accused, was seen alighting from the bus carrying a polythene bag in his hand. He was apprehended. Dy. S.P. Shri Varinder Kanwar was called to the spot through Constable Dalip Singh. The driver Amar Dass and Conductor Pratap Chand of the bus by which the accused had travelled were associated. The accused was asked if he would like to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. The accused vide Ex. PA gave his consent to the search by the police party. During such search, the accused was found carrying Charas in a polythene bag Ex. P.I, which was further wrapped in a cloth bag Ex. P. 3 and kept in the polythene bag Ex. P. 2 which the accused was carrying at the time of his apprehension. The Charas recovered on weighment was found to be 2 Kgs. Two samples weighing 25 grams each were taken out and separately sealed. The remaining quantity of charas was also separately sealed and taken into possession vide memo Ex. PB, a copy of which was delivered to the accused.

3. The investigation of the case was thereafter taken up by PW 12 ASI Chaman Lal after the registration of the case on the basis of the report Ex. PW 13/B of PW 13 ASI Pushap Lata vide FIR Ex. PW 12/D. The incriminating article recovered from the accused as per report of chemical examination was found to be charas.

4. After the completion of investigation, the accused was sent up for trial. The accused did not plead guilty to the charge and claimed trial,

5. The prosecution in support of its case, examined fifteen witnesses in all. The case of the accused as set out by him in his examination under Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, is that of denial simpliciter and false implication. No defence was led by the accused.

6. The learned Special Judge upon consideration of the evidence led before him, convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid vide impugned judgment dated 5.11.1998.

7. The learned Counsel for the accused, while assailing the conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused by the learned Special Judge, has raised the following contentions: (i) There has been non-compliance of Section 43 of the Act inasmuch as the search and seizure has been made by a police officer who has not been empowered in this behalf by the State Government; (ii) There has been non-compliance of Section 50 of the Act; (iii) The prosecution has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that search of the accused was carried out; (iv) There has been violation of Section 55 of the Act; (v) Since the complainant herself was the Investigation Officer, the case of