The judgment emphasizes the importance of strict compliance with procedural requirements and the examination of key witnesses to establish a strong prosecution case.

Sham Sunder, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 29.08.1997, and the order of sentence dated 02.09.1997, rendered by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Karnal, vide which it convicted the accused/appellant, for the offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called as the Act only) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years, and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac, and in default of payment of the same, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another period of two years.

2. The facts, in brief, are that on 16.09.1994 Inspector Kritpal Singh along with Head Constable Balwan Singh and other police officials, was present, on patrol duty, near village Amupur. When the police party reached near the tubewell of Nishan Singh, one Bahadar Singh son of Takhar Singh met it. In the meantime, the accused was seen coming with a gunny bag on his head. On seeing the police party, he changed his direction and started walking towards the fields with fast speed. On suspicion, he was apprehended. He disclosed his name as Chattar Singh son of Sadha Singh. Search of the gunny bag, being carried by him, was conducted in accordance with the provisions of law, in the presence of Chanda Singh, DSP, who was called by sending a VT message, which resulted into the recovery of 30 Kgs of poppy husk. Sample of 250 grams, was drawn. The sample and the remaining poppy husk were converted into parcels, sealed with the seal, bearing impression "RK", and taken into possession, vide recovery memo, prepared at the spot. Sample seal was handed over to Bahadar Singh. The site plan of the place of recovery, was also prepared. The accused was arrested. On reaching the Police Station, the entire case property was deposited with the Station House Officer, on the same day, in intact condition. The samples were sent to the Chemical Examiner for test. After the completion of investigation, the challan was presented.

3. On his appearance, in the Court, the copies of documents, relied upon by the prosecution, were supplied to the accused. Charge under Section 15 of the Act, was framed against him, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined Chanda Singh, DSP, (PW-1), and Kritpal Singh, Inspector, (PW-2). Affidavits Ex.PA of H.C. Ram Kumar, Ex.PB of Constable Dharam Singh and Ex.PC, report of Chemical Examiner were tendered into evidence. Bahadur Singh, an independent witness, was given up as won over by the accused. Thereafter, the Addl. PP for the State, closed the evidence.

5. The statement of the accused, under Section 313 Cr.P.C., was recorded, and he was put all the incriminating circumstances, appearing against him, in the prosecution evidence. He pleaded false implication. However, he did not lead any evidence, in defence.

6. After hearing the Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State, the Counsel for the accused, and, on going through the evidence, on record, the trial Court, convicted and sentenced the accused, as stated hereinbefore.

7. Feeling aggrieved, against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence, rendered by the trial Court, the instant appeal, was filed by the accused/appellant.

8. I have heard the Counsel for the parties, and have gone through the evidence, and record, of the case, carefully.

9. It was contended by the Counsel for the appellant that though the alleged recovery was effected from the accused/appellant on 16.09.1994, yet the sample was sent to the Office of the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban, on 26.09.1994. He further submitted that no explanation, whatsoever, was furnished by the prosecution witnesses, as to why, delay of ten days, was caused in sending the sample to the office of the Forensic Science Laboratory Haryana, Madhuban. Had any explanation, been furnished, the matter would have been considered, in the light thereof, but in the absen