Surinder Singh, J.

Respondent was charge-sheeted for the offence under section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short ‘The Act’), allegedly keeping in his possession 700 grams of ‘charas’. In Sessions trial No. 7 of 2000 decided by learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, HP, he acquitted the respondent on the ground of non compliance of section 50 of the Act and also on unfairness and lack of impartiality.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the evidence on record. In nut shell, the prosecution case can be summed up thus. On 1.12.1999 at about 8.30 AM, PW-10 SHO, PS, Aut was present at bus stand, Aut in connection with the investigation of some other case. In the meanwhile, PW-3 ASI Subhash Chand along with some police officials were going to the area of Sudhrani for conducting some investigation. At about 8.30 a.m, bus bearing registration No. HP-49-0232 came from bus Adda side and the passengers started alighting there from. The police officials aforesaid noticed the respondent and on seeing them, he started running towards bazaar with his bag in his right hand. He was over-powered and the police asked about his identity. Since he was nervous, the police suspected some contraband in his possession, as such gave him option to be searched before the Gazetted officer or before the Magistrate and a memo Ex PJ to that effect was prepared in the presence of (PW-9) Desh Raj and one Babu Ram, independent witness available there. Upon conducting search of the bag Ex P-4, some garments of the respondent were taken out along with a polythene bag, which contains 700 grams of ‘charas’. Police took photographs Exts P-5 to P-7 out of the recovered ‘charas’. Two samples of 20 grams each were separated and sealed with seal producing the impression of English letter ‘K’. Remaining quantity was also sealed with the same seal and the case property was taken into possession vide memo Ex PA.

3. Specimen impression of the seal was also preserved, one of which is Ex P-3. Police also prepared the rough sketch of the place of the alleged recovery vide Ex PK.

4. Respondent was arrested and grounds of arrest Ex PF were informed him, but at that time, he indicated his name as Lal Singh. Hence, information was sent to his father Chuni Lal through a special constable. The said official informed that he was known as Omi Chand and not Lal Singh. As the respondent happened to mislead the police, thus, challaned for the offence punishable under section 177 of Indian Penal Code. Ruka Ex PD was dispatched to the Police Station through ASI Subhash Chand, on the basis of which, formal FIR Ex PE was registered.

5. On 2.12.1999 a special report Ex PG was sent to the Superintendent of Police, Mandi. The case property was deposited in the Malkhana with MHC. During personal search, police had also recovered the currency notes of Rs. 300/- and other articles mentioned in the memo Ex PN. One of the sample parcel was sent for analysis to CTL, Kandaghatthrough constable Gauri Dutt. It tested positive for ‘charas’ as per report Ex PP.

6. After recording the statements of the witnesses and on completing the investigation, challan was presented, in the court for the trial of the respondent for the offence aforesaid. He was charge sheeted and put on trial. At the conclusion of the trial, he was acquitted aforesaid.

7. At the very outset, we would like to say that in the facts and circumstances of the case, learned trial court wrongly came to the conclusion that there was no compliance of section 50 of the Act for the simple reason that the recovery of alleged contraband was from the bag, to which the respondent was carrying in his hand. The object, purpose and scope of section 50 of the Act has been dealt in number of decisions of the Apex Court.

8. Recently in Ajmer Singh Vs. State of Haryana (2010) 3 SCC 746, while examining the compliance of aforesaid section, relied upon the State o