The judgment emphasizes the requirement of strict compliance with statutory provisions and the need for reliable and consistent evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in narcotic drug cases.

Ajay Mohan Goel, J.

By way of this appeal, State has challenged judgment passed by the Court of learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Mandi, in Sessions Trial No. 54/2010 dated 29.09.2011, vide which, the accused has been acquitted for commission of offence punishable under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief was that on the intervening night of 26/27th December, 2009, ASI Satish Kumar, Investigating Officer, Police Station Jogindernagar alongwith other police officials had set up a Naka at Cinema Chowk, Jogindernagar. HHG Amar Singh and HHG Kali Dass, were on patrolling duty in beat No. 2. They were also associated in the Naka by the Investigating Officer. At around 12.45 A.M., one HRTC bus of Keylong Depot bearing registration No. HP-66-1307 came from Manali which was on its way to Dharamshala. This bus was stopped for checking. Accused was found sitting on Seat No. 37. As soon as he saw the police party, he got perplexd, as a result of which, the police party became suspicious. During his personal search, he was found to have tied some material with Cello Tapes to both his legs. He was alighted from the bus. The Cello Tapes tied to his legs were removed and some material of black colour in the shape of chapattis and sticks was recovered from the accused, which he had tied to his legs. On smelling, this material was found to be Charas and when weighed it was found weighing 1 kilogram 550 grams. Biri Chand was the driver of the bus and Duni Chand was conductor of the said bus. When asked, conductor Duni Chand disclosed that the accused had boarded the bus from Kullu to Baijnath. The bus ticket of the accused was attested by Duni Chand which was taken into possession by the police. Recovered Charas was packed in a cloth parcel which was sealed with six seals of ‘S’. The socks of the accused and Cello Tape used for tying the Charas in legs, were put in another cloth parcel, which was also sealed with seal ‘S’. NCB form was filled on the spot. The seal after its use was handed over to Constable Inder Dev. Recovered case property was taken into possession by the police vide seizure memo Ext.PW1/B. Constable Inder Dev and HHG Rvainder Kumar put their signatures on the seizure memo as witnesses and accused also put his signatures on it. Rukka Ext. PW-8/B was scribed and sent to the Police Station through HHG Amar Singh on the basis of which FIR Ext. PW-8/A was registered. Site plan etc. were prepared. Accused was arrested and after completion of formalities, the case property as well as the accused were taken to the Police Station. Case property was produced before the then S.H.O. Police Station Jogindernagar for resealing, which was resealed with three seals of ‘N’. Case property was thereafter deposited with MHC Mangat Ram. The same was sent to the laboratory vide R.C. No. 213/09 through Constable Karam Singh. The recovered contraband on chemical examination was found to be Charas as per report of the Expert certificate Ext. PX.

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 evidence led both ocular as well as documentary, learned trial Court held that in view of non-association of independent witnesses coupled with the contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses who were police officials, the alleged recovery of Charas from the possession of the accused from his personal search was doubtful. It further held that the evidence adduced by the prosecution could not be said to be sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that 1 kilogram 550 grams Charas was recovered from the exclusive and conscious possession of the accused during his personal search. It was further held