The court held that the prosecution's reliance on police witnesses is valid despite absence of independent witnesses, emphasizing that procedural defects in sample collection did not automatically invalidate convictions, subject to established precedents.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.09.2007 passed by learned Special Judge, Mandi (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondent (accused before learned Trial Court) was convicted of the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (in short ‘NDPS’ Act) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment for three months. (Parties shall be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act. It was asserted that ASI Yog Raj (PW9), HHC Balwant Singh (PW2), Uday Chand and Constable-Prakash Chand were present at Shyam Ganga on 05.04.2006 for nakabandi and traffic checking duties. A motorcycle bearing registration No. HP-06K-3885 came from Kullu, which was signalled to stop. The police demanded papers from the driver. The registration certificate of the motorcycle showed its registration number as HR-06K-3885, whereas the bike displayed the registration number HP-06K-3885. The police became suspicious and enquired about the names and addresses of the motorcycle riders. The driver revealed his name as Devinder Singh, and the pillion rider revealed his name as Jitender Chaudhary. Their search was conducted, during which Charas was found in the backpack being carried by Jitender Chaudhary concealed beneath the clothes. The police weighed the charas and found its weight to be 6 kgs. Two samples of 25 grams each were taken for chemical analysis. The samples were put in different parcels, and each parcel was sealed with six impressions of seal ‘C’. The parcels were marked as A1 and A2. The remaining charas was also sealed in a parcel, and the parcel was marked as ‘A’. Seal impression (Ext. ‘PB’) was taken on a separate piece of cloth. NCB-I form (Ext. PR) was filled, and a seal impression was put on the form. The seal was handed over to Balwant Singh (PW2) after the use. Charas was seized vide memo (Ext. PC). Jacket (Ext. P7), Sweater (Ext. P8), Pants (Ext. P9), Shirt (Ext. P11), towel (Ext. P12), underwear (Ext. P13) and Vest (Ext. P14) of accused Devinder and jacket (Ext.P15) Pants (Ext. P16), Shirt (Ext. P17), and Vest (Ext. P18) of Jitender were seized vide memo (Ext. PH). ASI-Yog Raj (PW9) prepared the rukka (Ext. PJ) and sent it to the police station Sadar through Constable Prakash Chand for the registration of the FIR. FIR (Ext. PM) was registered in the Police Station. ASI-Yog Raj conducted the investigation on the spot. He prepared the site plan (Ext. PS) and recorded the statements of witnesses as per their version. He arrested the accused vide memos (Ext. PG and PF). He brought the case property and the accused to the police station and produced them before SHO-N.K. Sharma (PW10). N.K. Sharma re-sealed the sample parcels and the bulk parcel with seal ‘H’. He obtained the seal impression on the NCB-I form (Ext. PR) as well as the piece of cloth. He handed over all the articles to MHC-Nand Lal (PW7), who made an entry at Sr. No. 859 of the malkhana register (Ext. PN) and deposited the case property in malkhana. MHC Nand Lal handed over the sample parcel to Constable Mehar