The credibility of police officials' evidence, compliance with mandatory provisions of the N.D.P.S Act, and conscious possession of the contraband were central legal points established in the judgment.

1. Though the miscellaneous petition alone is listed for hearing, the learned counsel submitted that the appeal itself may be heard and disposed off. Accordingly, the appeal was heard and the same is disposed of.

2. The petitioner is the first accused in C.C.No.185 of 2005 on the file of the Special Court under the Essential commodities Act, Salem. There was yet another accused by name Chokkan @ Chokkanathan. The appellant stands convicted for offences under Sections 8( c ) read with 20(b)(ii)(c) and 25 of N.D.P.S Act and sentenced to undergo R.I for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default to undergo further R.I for two years. The second accused Chokkan @ Chokkanathan has been acquitted. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

i) P.W.1 was the Inspector of police, Prohibition Enforcement Wing, Dharmapuri during the year 2004. P.W.2 was the then Sub Inspector of Police of the said Wing. One M.Devendran (Head Constable No.1622), Police Constable Vivekanandan (P.C.No.1724) and another Constable Selvaraj (P.C.No.271) were also attached to the said Police Station. On 11.09.2004, at about 7.00 a.m. P.Ws 1 and 2 along with the above stated Police Constables were engaged in vehicle check up on Dharmapuri to Salem road at Elagiri road junction. At that time, a jeep bearing registration No.TN 20 D 919 was found proceeding towards Salem from Dharmapuri i.e. from North towards South. The registration number of the vehicle was not displayed on the front side of the jeep. P.W.1, with the help of others, intercepted the vehicle and as soon as the vehicle came to a halt, he caught hold the driver of the vehicle. Another person, who was also in the jeep fled away from the scene. From the information furnished by the driver of the vehicle, P.W.1 came to know that his name is Ramesh S/O.Ramiah (appellant). The appellant told him that the person who escaped from the scene was one Chokkan @ Chokkanathan (A2) P.W.1 was given to understand that Ganja was being stealthily transported in the jeep. Therefore, P.W.1 decided to make a search. Before doing the search, P.W.1 informed the appellant that he had the right to have search conducted in the presence of either a Gazetted Officer or a Judicial magistrate. Such information given in writing by P.W.1 is Ex.P.1. The appellant acknowledged the same. Thereafter, the appellant informed P.W.1 that it was not necessary for search in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Judicial Magistrate and instead, P.W.1 himself can do the same. Thereafter, P.W.1 along with others searched the jeep. He found 13 gunny bags in the jeep. He unloaded the same from the jeep. On opening the gunny bags, he found that all the bags contained Ganja mixed with seeds. From out of the smell, he could perceive that it was Ganja. with the help of a scale, when he weighed the bags, he found the same weighing 85 Kgs, 85 Kgs, 60 Kgs, 10 Kgs, 30 Kgs, 25 Kgs, 17 Kgs, 22Kgs, 22kgs, 22 Kgs, 22 Kgs, 22 Kgs and 20Kgs respectively and the total weight was 442 kilograms. He drew two representative samples from each gunny bag. Likewise, he took 26 pockets of samples. P.W.1 tied the pockets with twine thread and stitched the Ganja bags. Then he affixed seals on the sample pockets and gunny bags. He obtained the signature of the appellant and the witnesses on slips and pasted the same on the sample pockets. He seized the Ganja bags and the jeep with a spare tyre under a mahazar-Ex.P.2. M.Os. 1 to 13 are the Ganja bags seized from the possession of the appellant. M.Os.14 to 39 are the sample pockets, of which, M.Os.27 to 39 are the sample pockets returned by the Forensic lab after examination. M.O.40 is the jeep. M.O.49 is the tyre. Then he recorded the statement of the accused. The accused was arrested and arrest memo was served on him under Ex.P.4. Then he took the accused and seized the articles to Prohi