The prosecution must establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Compliance with the requirements of the Act, corroboration of confession statements, and subsequent conduct of the accused are crucial in reaching a decision.

(1) SINCE the issues involved in these appeals are one and the same, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common judgment.

(2) FOLLOWING is the factual backdrop of prosecution case in brief :

P. W. 1, Inspector of Customs, P. W. 2, Superintendent of Customs and their party belonging to Rameswaram Customs Office, on a tip-off, proceeded to the house of the first accused Muthunachi in Vilayattu Mariamman Koil Street, Rameswaram, on 18-12-2003 at 10.00 a.m. along with two independent witnesses P. Ws. 3 and 4. When they entered into the house, 1st accused Muthunachi and 2nd accused were present. They asked 1st accused whether a person belonging to Srilanka had been staying in her house for the past few days and they had to enquire about it. 1st accused promised to extend her full co-operation. On enquiry, 2nd accused told that his father is one Gonsal alias Stephen, that he came to Dhanushkodi Kambipadu Seashore from Srilanka by a country boat belonging to one Kandasamy and with the help of the said Kandasamy, he identified the house of 1st accused and was staying there and that one Gunasekaran residing in Chettiar Street, Ceylon approached him and asked him to Smuggle Narcotic Drug from India and handover to him. While 1st accused was enquired, she told that at about 4.00 a.m. on the same day, one Dyliston (4th accused) and Ceylon Sekar (3rd accused) of Rameswaram came to her house and handed over a parcel containing Narcotic substance for giving to 2nd accused. She voluntarily produced a school bag from the backside of television in her house and took out a polythene parcel fully packed by adhesive tape and told the officials that it was the parcel which was entrusted to her by Ceylon Sek

In the presence of both the accused P. W. 1 and others opened the parcel and found another polythene parcel inside, containing a brown colour powder. They put a sample of the said powder in Narcotic Drug test kit for examination, which gave positive answer for a narcotic substance called "morphine". Representative Homogenous samples were taken as per following procedure : 3(a) Entire drug weighed along with polythene bag at 1.025 kilogram. As per procedure, two samples of 5 grams each was collected from the said brown colour pocket, put them in separate parcels in a brown colour cover and it was then pasted with another cover and was given numbers as B1 S1 and B1 S2 respectively. In both the covers left thumb impression of 1st accused and, signatures of the 2nd accused were obtained. On the two sample pockets, the office seal showing 'Customs House, Rameswaram No. 12 was put and 5 seals were put in each of the property. On the cover, the signatures of the 2nd accused and both the witnesses were obtained. Left thumb impression of 1st accused was obtained in both the parcels. Afterwards both the parcels were closed by adhesive tape and put in 2 or 3 polythene covers and it was again put in white cloth which was then stitched. Over that bag they again put the Customs House No. 12 seal in 7 places. Then 2nd accused and witnesses signed. L. T. I. of 1st accused was also obtained. The two polythene pockets which were pasted by the adhesive tape at the beginning of the search was kept inside the school bag and the said bag was put in a white cloth which was stitched, over which the officials put their office seal in 7 places and they gave number as P2 in which the witnesses and 2nd accused signed and 1st accused put her L. T. I.

(3) THE value of the seized contraband was Rs. 1,00,000/-. A Mahazar was also prepared in Ex. P1 in whiich signatures of witnesses and 2nd accused and L. T. I. of 1 st accused were obtained. By means of Ex. P.2 deposit memo, the contraband was deposited with Customs Godown.

(4) EX. Ps. 3 and 4 are the confession statements given by both the accused in the presence of witnesses. Thereafter both the accused were arrested and EXs. P5 and P6 Arrest Memos were prepared for both the accused respectively in which