Surjit Singh, J.—These two appeals arise out of a common judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Shimla whereby the appellants (in both the appeals) have been convicted of an offence under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, hereinafter referred to as Act, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of rupees one lakh each; in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of two years each. So both the appeals are being disposed of together.

2. Prosecution case, as unfolded by the evidence adduced during the course of trial, may be summed up thus. On the night intervening 29th/30th October, 2002, around 12.15 a.m. when Khazana Ram (PW-9), Inspector (CID), Shimla was present at Boileauganj Chowk alongwith Inspector Ram Lai, HC Sanjeev Kumar, HC Ashok Kumar (PW-1) and Constable Mohinder Singh (PW-4), someone informed him that a Maruti Van bearing registration No. HP-01-1123 (registered as taxi) was coming from Ghanahatti side and in that van Charas was being transported. The information was reduced into writing by PW-9 Khazana Ram and sent to the Superintendent of Police (CID) through HC Ashok Kumar (PW-1). Around 1.15 a.m. Maruti Van (taxi) bearing the aforesaid registration number came from Ghanahatti side. It was intercepted. There were two occupants, including the driver. Appellant Vidya Sagar was in drivers seat while appellant Dharam Pal was sitting beside the driver.In between the two appellants one polythene bag was found lying. Khazana Ram, Inspector informed the appellants that he had the information that Charas was being carried in the van (taxi) and, therefore, it was intended to search their persons as also the van and in case they so desired, search could be arranged in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. The appellants opted for search by the police officials present on the spot. Thereafter search was conducted. The bag, which was found lying on the front seat between the two appellants, was found to contain Charas, which weighed one kilogram 600 grams. Two samples, each weighing 25 grams, were separated. The samples and the bulk Charas were made up into three separate parcels which were then sealed with a seal that produced the impression of letter T. A written report of the search and seizure was prepared and sent to the Police Station for formal registration of the case. The two appellants were taken into custody. They were informed in writing about the grounds of their arrest. The case property was deposited with the Station House Officer, who re-sealed the three parcels with his own seal. One of the two samples was sent to the Chemical Examiner, who reported that the sample contained contents of Charas.

3. Case was filed in the Court of learned Sessions Judge on the completion of investigation. Appellants were charged with offence under Section 20 of the Act. They pleaded not guilty. Therefore, they were put on trial. On the conclusion of the trial, they were found guilty and convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

4. As already noticed, the appellants have filed separate appeals. During the course of the hearing of the appeals, following points were urged on behalf of the appellants:— (a) The entire quantity of the stuff, allegedly recovered from the appellants, was not Charas and only a part of it to the extent of the percentage of resin found in the sample by the Chemical Examiner, vide report Ext. PL, could be said to be Charas; (b) Evidence on record indicated that the independent witnesses were not there on the spot, but they were called to the police station where besides the appellants, three more occupants of the van, in question, were there and it was at the police station that the independent witnesses Pyare Lal (PW-2) and Anil Kumar (PW-3) were made to sign the seizure memo and other papers and the appellants were falsely implicated while other three occup