The prosecution must prove the integrity and safe custody of samples in drug-related offences; failure to do so leads to reasonable doubt and potential acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

D.Dash, J.

The Appellant, by filing this Appeal, has assailed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 7th February 2003 passed by the learned Special Judge-cum-Sessions Judge, Ganjam-Gajapati, Berhampur in G.R. Case No.24 of 2000 (N).

The Appellant (accused) has been convicted for offence under section-20(b)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short, the NDPS Act), 1985 (as it was then) and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five (5) years.

2. Prosecution case is that on 28th May 2000, around 11 am, the Sub-Inspector (S.I.) of Police attached to Badabazar Police Station (P.w.2) when was in-charge of the station diary of the said Police Station, received information that the accused was there, near the fish market and carrying Ganja. He (P.W.2) having entered the said fact in the Station Diary Book maintained at the Police Station, brought it to the notice to the Inspector-In- Charge (IIC), of the said Police Station as well as the Superintendent of Police, Berhampur. He, therefore, proceeded to the spot with Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police (P.W.5) and others as per the direction of the IIC. On their arrival, the accused was located and he then at their sight was trying to escape with the bag. The ASI (P.W.5) and the S.I. (P.W.2) chased the accused and ultimately nabbed him at Anandanagar Sahi near the house of one M. Shankar Rao. The accused disclosed his name which tallied with the name that P.W.2 had been informed. P.W.2 giving his identity to the accused, called independent witnesses (P.W.1) and P.W.3; the accused was given open to be searched either in presence of Magistrate or Gazetted Officer, and he then opted in writing to be searched in presence of a Gazetted Officer. So, the S.I. of Police (P.W.2) intimated the IIC for deputing the Gazetted Officer P.W.6 who was then the Inspector of Police being a Gazetted Officer came to the spot. In his presence, after observing legal formalities, the search operation was taken up. The plastic gunny bag carried by the accused being searched was found to contain Ganja. The contents were being weighed; the weight came to 450 grams. The P.W.2 then collected two parts of sample each weighing 25 grams from the said contents of the bag. The sample packets as well as the bag containing the bulk ganja was sealed by using the brass seal and that was handed over in zima of P.W.1, upon his execution of a zimanama. All those articles were seized near the seizure list, and the accused being arrested, was taken to the Police Station where P.W.2 handed over the accused as also the seized articles and documents prepared at the spot to the IIC, who then directed another Sub-Inspector of Police (P.W.7) to go ahead with the investigation. The I.O. (P.w.7) on 29.05.2000 produced the samples before the Court and on his prayer, those were sent for chemical examination. The report having come that those were nothing but Ganja, Final Form was submitted, placing the accused to face trial for the offence under section-20(b)(i) of the NDPS Act.

3. The Trial Court upon examining the evidence of the prosecution witnesses P.W.1 to P.W.7 as also the documents proved from the side of the prosecution has held the prosecution to have established the charge that the accused was in possession of contraband ganja of 450 grams at the relevant time of search and seizure. Accordingly, the accused has been held guilty for the offence under section-20(b)(i) of the NDPS Act (as it was then) and he has been sentenced as aforestated.

4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the quantum of contraband said to have been seized from the possession of the accused is 450 grams and t