The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to adhere to mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act undermines the case.

JUDGMENT :

Mohd Yousuf Wani, J.

1. Delay condoned and leave to file appeal granted vide Order dated 11^th October, 2022.

2. Impugned in the instant appeal filed by the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir is the judgment of acquittal dated 8^th October, 20015, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kathua, [hereinafter referred to as the “trial court” for short] while culminating trial on a criminal case bearing FIR No. 413/2013 of P/S Kathua, and titled as State vs. Farman Ali and Anr bearing File No. 31/Session instituted on 4^th January, 2014.

3. The impugned judgment has been assailed by the appellant-Union Territory of J&K on the main grounds that case FIR No. 413/2013 came to be registered with the Police Station, Kathua, pursuant to the recovery of 10,000 capsules of SPM-PRX from the respondents/accused [6000 capsules from R-1 and 4000 capsules from R-2] on 5^th November, 2013 at 5:30 P.M., when they came to be apprehended by a Police Patrolling Party of Police Post Industrial Estate, Kathua, who failed to account for the possession of the same. That the seizure and sampling of the recovered contraband substance was done as per the procedure and the statements of the witnesses also came to be recorded. That the commission of offences punishable under Sections 8/21/22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ,[hereinafter referred to as “the NDPS Act” for short] came to be established against the respondents during the investigation which led to the presentation of the final report/challan before the learned trial court. That the witnesses examined by prosecution at the trial proved the recovery and seizure of the contraband substance against the respondents, but the learned trial court did not appreciate and weigh the prosecution evidence in the right perspective. That the learned trial court has given weightage to some minor contradictions and has brushed aside the evidence adduced at the trial by the prosecution. That the learned trial court has mis-appreciated the law with respect to routine search and applicability of Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act and the evidence on record. That there is enough evidence on record which warrants conviction and sentence of respondents/accused for commission of the offences under Section 8/21/22 of the NDPS Act.

4. The facts of the prosecution case, which are relevant for the disposal of this appeal, are that on 5^th November, 2013, at 5:30 P.M., a police party of Police Post, Industrial Estate, Kathua, comprising of Head Constable Daleep Singh No. 526, Constable Manjeeb Kumar, Constable Naseeb Chand and SPO Ajay Kumar No. 1355, while being on patrolling and upon reaching at Magger Khad witnessed two persons coming from Punjab side who were carrying bag and packet in their hands. That both the persons upon seeing the police party tried to escape under suspicious circumstances, but the police party chased and caught hold of them. That they disclosed their names as Farhan Ali S/O Bari Din R/O Bhaideen Pattan, Tehsil and District Kathua and Johnson Alias Raki S/O. Bodh Raj R/O. Ward No. 10, District Kathua (the respondents/accused). That upon search, 6000 capsules of SPM-PRX came to be recovered from the bag carried by the respondent no. 1 when 4000 of such capsules came to be recovered from the polythene packet that was carried by the respondent no. 2 in his hand. That the respondents failed to account for those capsules which they had illegally brought from Punjab for sale in the Kathua town. That a docket was prepared on the spot and sent through Constable Manjeeb Kumar to the Police Station, Kathua, for registration of the FIR. That FIR No. 413/2013 came to be registered with the Police Station, Kathua, against the respondents in respect of the incident. That the investigation in the case was entrusted to SI Rajesh Gautam, the then Officer Incharge of Police Post, Industrial Estate, Hatli. That the Investigating Officer reached on spot and prepared the si