The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to provide satisfactory explanation and proper documentation regarding the custody and production of seized items, as well as the importance of trustworthiness and consistency in witness testimony.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned I Additional Special Judge for NDPS Cases, Chennai, in C.C.No.97 of 2007 dated 09.04.2014.)

1. The present Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 09.04.2014, passed in C.C.No.97 of 2007 on the file of the learned Special Judge, I Additional Special Court under NDPS Act, Chennai.

2. The appellant is arrayed as Accused No.1 in the above referred case. The case against the Accused No.2, was already split up and taken up on file separately in C.C.No.3 of 2014 vide order dated 21.01.2014.

3. By judgment dated 09.04.2014, the learned Special Judge, I Additional Special Court under NDPS Act, Chennai, found the accused guilty for the offence under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii)(B) of NDPS Act and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him to undergo three years of rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. The trial Court further ordered to set off the sentence already undergone by the accused, under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.

4. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the accused is before this Court, by filing the present Criminal Appeal.

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

(i) PW2-Thiru.K.S.Senthil, was working as a Sub-Inspector of Police in NIBCID. On 04.06.2007, at about 7.00pm, his informant contacted him over phone and informed that between 8.00 to 12.00pm, the present accused Ramachandran and one another [absconding] accused Chinna, would come near to Buhari Hotel, available on the Gandhi Irvin Road, Egmore, with some contraband. That intimation was reduced into writing and placed before PW5-Thiru.S.Murugaiyan, the Inspector of Police, NIBCID by 7.15pm.

(ii) After getting permission from the Inspector of Police, PW2 along with the police party consisting of Sub Inspector Thiru.A.Malaichamy, Head Constables viz., Thiru.Sridharan, Thiru.Arul Kumar, Thiru.Sakthivel and Thiru.Karthikeyan, left the police station by 7.30pm and reached the place informed by the informant at 8.00pm. They were keeping the place under surveillance. By 9.00pm, the accused herein with another accused Chinna, came there. The accused were identified by the informant.

(iii) Immediately, PW2, intercepted them, enquired them and ascertained that the said persons were the persons mentioned by the informant. Both accused were carrying a rexine suitcase and travel bags separately in their hands. PW2, informed to them about the right available to the accused in respect of search, under NDPS Act. Both accused declined the offer of conducting the search in the presence of Gazetted Officer or a Judicial Magistrate and prepared for search by the Sub Inspector of Police.

(iv) The bags carried by the accused were searched. Ganja was found in each bags. The ganja alone was weighed. The accused herein carried 18Kgs of ganja and another absconding accused Chinna carried 18Kgs of ganja. Samples were collected from each bulk quantity and packed separately. In the bags, labels were affixed and then sealed. A cash of Rs.2,500/- was recovered from the absconding accused Chinna. Both the accused were arrested for possessing ganja, without valid licence or permit. The ganja was seized and the accused were arrested.

(v) In continuation of investigation, on 05.06.2007, at about 00.30 hours, PW2, prepared a report under Section 57 of the NDPS Act and handed over the report along with the accused to PW5-Thiru.S.Murugaiyan, Inspector of Police. He has also produced the contraband to PW5.

(vi) Upon receipt of the same, PW5, registered a case in Cr.No.66 of 2007 under Section 8(c) r/w 20 (b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act. Further, he took steps to send the accused for remand and to send the samples for analysis through the Court. In this regard, he sent necessary application for chemical examinatio