The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's consideration of evidence, compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, and the proportionality of the sentence imposed, leading to the modification of the appellant's sentence.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer:This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. r/w 36-B of NDPS Act 1985, to call for records and set aside the conviction of the appellant in C.C.No.44 of 2013 dated 09.03.2018 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for E.C. and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai by allowing this appeal.

1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant/second accused in C.C.No.44 of 2013 dated 09.03.2018 on the file of the Special Court for E.C. and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 22.03.2013 on receipt of the reliable information, as per the instructions of the Superintendent, NCB, Trivandrum (Camp at Madurai), the Intelligence Officer Syed Sharique Omar constituted a team of officers of NCB Madurai and proceeded to the place at about 17.00 hours, that after reaching Sirukoodalpatti Bus Stop, they had arranged two persons to stand as witnesses and have proceeded to the house bearing No.4/75C, New No.791, Vairavapuram, Sirukoodalpatti, that the accused Veeramani @ Siva, on seeing the police party, tried to flee from that spot, that the team had knocked the door of the ground floor portion and the accused Kaliammal has come out of the house, that the said Kaliammal had taken the police party to the first floor portion and knocked the door, that the team found the presence of Masoud Mosavi/first accused and Mahmood Zafarani/second accused, Iranian Nationals, that the first accused lost his balance and knocked over a 10 litre glass condenser to the floor, slipped on the split liquid and banged his head against the mosaic floor injuring himself in the process, that after bringing the first accused under control, they came to know that the two Iranian individuals were illegally manufacturing Methamphetamine in that house, that the NCB team found that the room itself was looking like a laboratory, that the accused had then handed over one jute carry bag, which when opened revealed within two transparent plastic sachets containing a crystalline substance, that the Intelligence Officer drew a small quantity of the said substance from each of the plastic sachets and tested against the Drug Detection Kit and the tests answered positive for the presence of Methamphetamine, a psychotropic substance covered under NDPS Act, that the NCB has seized 5.77kgs of contraband and also other chemicals, equipments used for manufacture of Methamphetamine through Seizure Mahazar, that subsequently, the Intelligence Officer Syed Sharique Omar has issued Section 67 summons to all the three accused, that when the accused had appeared, in pursuance of the said summons, they have given voluntary statements and that thereafter, all the three accused were arrested and were remanded to judicial custody.

3. It is further case of the prosecution that on the basis of the initial investigation and voluntary statement given by the accused 1 to 3, NCB team conducted a search of the premises in East Thane, Maharashtra in the residence of the fourth accused, that after taking the voluntary statements from the accused 4 and 5, they were arrested on 03.04.2013 and were remanded to judicial custody and that after completing the investigation, complaint came to be filed against 7 accused alleging that the accused 1 to 7 have collectively entered into criminal conspiracy at Vairavapuram, Sirukoodalpatti and such far-off places at Mumbai, Delhi and Chennai in the year 2012-2013 for the financing, procurement, possession, transportation, harbouring and the attempt to illegally traffic Methamphetamine, a psychotropic substance and thereby have collectively contravened the provisions of Sections 8(c) r/w 22(c), 25, 28, 29, 30 and Section 9(A) r/w Sections 25A, 21, 27A of NDPS Act 1985 and are punishable under Sections 22, 25, 25A, 27A, 28, 29 and 30 of NDPS Act, as amended.

4. After the receipt of the complaint, cognizance was t