JUDGMENT :

The present appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence dated 18.04.2016, passed in C.C.No.186 of 2008, on the file of the learned I Additional Special Judge for NDPS Act cases, Madurai.

2. The appellant is the accused in C.C.No.186 of 2008. She stood charged for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act [hereinafter referred to as ''the NDPS Act]. She denied the charge and opted for trial. After full-fledged trial, the Presiding Officer of the Special Court for NDPS Act cases found the accused guilty under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.8,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. Challenging the same, the accused is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal.

3. The relevant facts of the case, which gave rise to filing of this appeal are necessary to be recapitulated for the disposal of this appeal.

(i) On 24.09.2005, while P.W.4 – Nambinarayanan, who is the Head Constable, Palayamkottai Police Station, had been on duty in N.I.B.C.I.D., at Dindigul, received an intimation in respect of the movement of contraband and recorded the same in Ex.P.6. After recording the same before his superior officer, obtained permission for proceeding with further action.

(ii) After obtaining permission as above, along with P.W.3 – Rekha, PW4 reached the occurrence place and on 29.05.2005 around 07.15 a.m., upon the information given by the Informant, he secured the accused viz., Mokkathai and one Dharmaraj. After securing the accused as above, P.W.4 informed the accused the right guaranteed under Section 50 of the NDPS Act in respect of the search made before the learned Judicial Magistrate or before the Gazetted Officer. Since the accused did not want to exercise the right, the reply given by the accused had been recorded under Ex.P.4 [Consent letter] and thereafter, P.W.3 – Rekha, who is the woman Head Constable, searched the accused and found that the accused had been in possession of 2.5 K.Gs. of Ganja. After seeing as above, both P.W.3 and P.W.4 took 250 Gms. of sample and sealed the remaining contraband. The Mahazar, which was prepared for recovery of contraband, was marked as Ex.P.5.

(iii) After completing the above formalities, P.W.4 along with accused arrived at the Police Station and registered a case against the accused in Crime Nos.137 and 138 of 2005 under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. After registration of the case, he handed over the case records to P.W.5 – Veeramani along with recovered contraband for further investigation.

(iv) P.W.5 – Veeramani, the then Inspector of Police, N.B.I.C.I.D., Sivagangai, on receipt of the F.I.R., took up the same for investigation. He examined the accused and through Form-95, he produced the contraband before the Court and sent requisition for chemical examination of the contraband.

(v) P.W.2 – Krishnamoorthy, the then Sheristadar of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Madurai, on 30.09.2005, received the contraband and assigned R.P.R.No.1451 of 2005 and thereafter, in view of the request given by P.W.5, forwarded the sample to the Chemical Examiner and then P.W.1 – R. Meenakshi, Scientific Assistant, Forensic Science Department, Madurai, on 30.09.2005 received the contraband along with the requisition under Ex.P.2. On examination, she found that the sample contraband contains cannabinoids (Ganja). In this regard, she issued report under Ex.P.3.

(vi) In continuation of investigation, P.W.5 examined the Scientific Examiner, the Head Clerk and recorded their statements. Thereafter, he came to the positive conclusion that the accused had committed the offence under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act and filed final report accordingly.

4. Based on the above materials, the learned Trial Judge framed the charge under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) o