The prosecution must prove exclusive and conscious possession of contraband beyond reasonable doubt. The applicability of Section 50 of the ND&PS Act depends on the nature of the search and seizure.

Ajay Mohan Goel, J.:

This appeal has been filed by State against the judgment passed by the Court of learned Special Judge (Fast Track Court), Solan, in Case No. 5FTC/7 of 2010 dated 30.11.2010, vide which, learned trial Court has acquitted the accused for commission of offence punishable under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act.

2. The case of the prosecution was that on 14.11.2009 Maheshinder Singh, ASI, Police Station, Sadar Solan alongwith other police officials reached at Oachghat-Damog road near the orchard of Sudhir Sood at Nandal (Gavaili) at around 4.00 P.M. and as soon as they saw the police vehicle No. HP-14-A-6205, two boys ran towards Damog side one of whom was apprehended by SHO Police Station, Sadar Solan with the help of other accompanying police officials and other boy (accused) was apprehended by ASI Maheshinder Singh with the help of HC Nek Ram etc. at a distance of 20-30 yards away from the place where the other boy was apprehended by the SHO. At that time, one Rakesh Kumar also came there and in his presence, the name of the accused were asked by the police party. The accused disclosed his name as Sanjay Kumar alias Sanju son of Amar Singh, resident of Shayaghat P.O. Kotla Pajota, Tehsil Pachhad, District Sirmaur. The accused was carrying a cloth bag of dark green colour in his right hand and on suspicion that the said accused was carrying some suspicious substance in the said bag, ASI Maheshinder Singh gave in writing to the said accused that the bag was liable to be searched and on this, accused gave his consent that the search can be conducted by ASI Maheshinder Singh. Thereafter, ASI Maheshinder Singh, other police officials and Rakesh Kumar gave their personal search to the accused and Memos regarding consent and personal search were accordingly prepared. This was followed by search of the bag of the accused which he was carrying in his right hand, inside which there was a polythene bag of white and red colour on which in English language ‘have a nice day’ was found written. When the said polythene bag was checked, substance like Dhoop Batinuma in the shape of sticks were found and the substance was smelled, tasted and burnt and contraband was found to be Charas. Scale and weights were taken out by the Investigating Officer from his investigation bag and after the Charas was weighed, the same was found to be 300 grams. The said recovered Charas was put in the same polythene bag which was thereafter put in the cloth bag and the same were sealed in a cloth parcel with seal impression ‘A’ at 9 places. Specimen seal impression of ‘A’ was separately drawn and NCB form in triplicate was also filled in and the specimen of seal impression ‘A’ was also drawn on NCB form and thereafter, seal was handed over to witness Rakesh. The parcel of Charas was taken into possession vide Memo by the police duly signed by the witness and accused and copy of same was also provided to the accused free of cost. Rukka was scribed by the Investigating Officer and the same was sent to Police Station Sadar Solan through Constable Nanak Chand for registration of FIR. Photographs of Charas and accused were taken on the spot by the Investigating Officer and site plan was also prepared. Thereafter, the accused was arrested. Information of his arrest was given to his relative. Case property was deposited by the Investigating Officer with MHC of Police Station Sadar who deposited the same in the Malkhana and later on, same was sent to FSL Junga and Chemical Examiner gave his opinion that the samples were that of Charas.

3. After completion of the investigation, challan was filed in the Court and as a prima facie case was found against the accused, he was charged for commission of offence punishable under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, to which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. On the basis of material produced on record by the prosecution, learned trial Court held th