The prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the contraband articles recovered from the accused are the same articles sent for chemical examination.

C. R. PAL, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant who has been convicted and sentenced under S. 20 (b) (i) of the. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 (in short 'the Act') to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment far a further period of one year has preferred this appeal assailing the said order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kalahandi-Nuapada, Bhawanipatna in 2 (a) C. C. No. 163 of 1992.

( 2 ) THE case against the appellant is that on 9-6-1992 at about 12. 30 p. m. the S. I. of Excise (P. W. 3) while patrolling on the platform at Kosinga Railway Station with his other staff found the appellant in possession of a raxin bag containing two packets of Ganja. He weighed the contraband articles which came to 10 kgs. and seized the same under the seizure list, Ext. 1, in presence of witnesses. The S. I. collected 25 grams of Ganja as samples from each of the two packets of Ganja seized from the appellant and sent thesaid samples to the Deputy Drugs Controller Bhubaneswar, for chemical examination with a forwarding letter. After further investigation and on receiving the chemical examiner's report he submitted the prosecution report against the appellant. On the above allegations, the appellant was charged for the offence under S. 20 (b) (i) of the Act to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

( 3 ) THE case of the appellant is a complete denial of the allegations levelled against him.

( 4 ) IN order to prove its case, the prosecution examined three witnesses out of whom P. W. 1 is a constable of Excise, and is a witness to the seizure, P. W. 2 is an independent witness and P. W. 3 is the S. I. of Excise. In course of trial, the prosecution also exhibited the seizure list, Ext. 1, copy of the forwarding letter Ext. 2 and report the Chemical Examiner, Ext. 3. The appellant did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence. The trial Court relying on the evidence adduced by the prosecution convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.

( 5 ) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the prosecution having failed to establish that the contraband articles recovered from the possession of the appellant were the very same articles sent for chemical examination, the appellant cannot be held guilty for possessing the contraband articles in question. The learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the State, on the other hand, contended that the seizure of the articles in question has duly been proved and there is no scope to doubt that the seized articles were Ganja and were possession of the appellant. In view of the above rival contentions, it becomes necessary to examine the evidence available on record to see how far the findings of the trial Court regarding the recovery of Ganja from the possession of the appellant is sustainable. In the above context, it noticed that out of the three witnesses examined in this case P. Ws. 1 and 3 are official witness and P. W. 2 is the only independent witness. P. W. 2 has denied his knowledge about the occurrence and thus has not supported the prosecution case. This witness has not also been declared hostile and cross-examined by the prosecution. From the other two witnesses, P. W. 1 is a constable of Excise. He has deposed that on suspicion the S. I. of Excise opened the bag and found contraband Ganja in the bag and after taking the weight and collecting the samples seized the same. This witness has not whispered a word about putting the seized articles or the samples collected therefrom under sealed cover. According to P. W. 1, the contraband articles were taken to the office of the S. I. of Excise along with the appellant, P. W. 3, the S. I. of Excise, in his testimony has deposed that on suspicion he searched the bag of the appellant and recovered two packets of Ganja which weighted 10 kgs. and he seized the same under the seizure list, Ext.