The legality of recovery of contraband, compliance with statutory mandates, and the presence of bias or likelihood of bias on the part of the Investigating Officer are crucial factors in determining the guilt of the accused in cases involving possession of contraband.

Sureshwar Thakur, J.

1. The instant appeal is directed by the State against the impugned judgment rendered on 12.08.2016 by the learned Special Judge, Chamba, H.P. whereby, the latter pronounced an order of acquittal upon the accused/respondents for theirs allegedly committing offences punishable under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 “hereinafter referred to as the Act.”

2. Brief facts, of the case are that on 18.3.2013 at about 11.00 p.m. police party headed by head constable Virender Singh alongwith male and female constables were on Nakabandi duty near Pol Technical College, Sarol. At about 11.35 p.m. HRTC bus came from Chamba and was on way to Amritsar. On seeing the police party they became perplexed and on suspicion their names and addresses were inquired by the Investigating Officer. Police party gave their personal search to both the accused.

3. On the direction of S.P. HC Virender Singh conducted personal search of accused Hoshiar Singh and one polythene was found concealed by him under his sweater containing Charas. Similarly, personal search of co-accused Shanto Devi was conducted by Lady constable Seema and she was found in possession of one bag which was kept by her on her lap under her worn shawl and on completion of the investigations, into the offences, allegedly committed by both the accused, the Investigating Officer concerned prepared besides filed a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. before the Court concerned.

4. Thereupon, both the accused stood charged by the learned trial Court “for theirs” allegedly committing offences punishable under Sections 20 and 29 of the Act, to charge whereof they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined seventeen witnesses. On closure of the prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, were recorded wherein they pleaded innocence and claimed false implication, thereafter they did not choose to lead any defence evidence.

5. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court returned findings of acquittal upon the accused.

6. The State of H.P. is aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal pronounced upon the accused/respondents, by the learned Trial Court. Mr. R.S. Thakur, the learned Additional Advocate General, has concertedly and vigorously contended that the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court being not harbored upon a proper appreciation "by it" of the evidence on record rather theirs standing se-quelled by gross mis-appreciation "by it" of the material evidence on record. Hence, he, contends that the findings of acquittal warranting reversal by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs being replaced by findings of conviction besides concomitantly, appropriate sentences being imposed upon the accused/respondents.

7. On the other hand, the learned defence counsel has with considerable force and vigour, contended that the findings of acquittal recorded by the Court below, being based on a mature and balanced appreciation "by it" of the evidence on record, hence theirs not warranting any interference, rather theirs meriting vindication.

8. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record.

9. Recovery of charas weighing 1 Kg. “each” stood respectively effectuated from the respective purported conscious and exclusive possession of the accused “under memos” respectively comprised in Ext.PW-13/E and in Ext.PW-13/F. In sequel to recoveries the aforesaid quantum of contraband standing effectuated from the purported conscious and exclusive possession “of each of the accused” the Investigating Officer concerned prepared NCB forms, forms whereof respectively stand comprised in Ext.PW-12/E and in Ext.PW-12/F “wherein” revelations occur with respect to his “embossing upon” e