Compliance with mandatory provisions of the Act, disclosure of secret information, production of essential witnesses, and entire link evidence are crucial for the prosecution's case.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment/order dated 1-12-1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.

2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal as contained in the First Information Report Ex: PC/1 are that on 18-8-1993. Inspector Sube Singh of Police Station Verowal along with A.S.I. Jagir Singh, Head Constable Harbhajan Singh and other police officials was present on the turning of Nagoke in connection with patrolling. He received a secret information that a person indulging in illicit trade of narcotics had been coming on Hero Honda every Wednesday and used to sell opium to the opium eaters near that village and the adjoining villages, and that day being a Wednesday, he would be coming from the side of Khalchain. On this information, Arjan Singh, a resident of Khadoor Sahib was joined in the Police Party which held naka in the area of Mianwind on the minor canal bridge. After sometime the appellant was sighted while coming from the side of village Mianwind on motor cycle No. PAK 6966. On suspicion he was apprehended. Inspector Sube Singh told him that he was to conduct his search and as to whether he (appellant) wanted to get his search conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate but the appellant reposed faith in the Sub Inspector. The statement Ex.PA of the appellant was reduced into writing. Inspector Sube Singh conducted the search of the bag recovered from the carrier of the motor- cycle of the appellant as a result of which 2 kilograms of opium wrapped in a glazed paper was recovered for which the appellant could not produce any permit or licence. A sample weighing 10 grams was separated. The sample and the remaining opium were converted into two sealed parcels with the seal of SS. Recovery memo Ex. PB was prepared. The sample seal was also prepared. The seal after use was handed over to Arjan Singh a public witness. Ruqa Ex. PC was sent to the Police Station on the basis of which formal FIR Ex. PC/1 was recorded. The sealed parcels and the sample seal were deposited in the Malkhana. Sample parcel was sent to the office of the Forensic Science Laboratory. After the receipt of the report of the Chemical Examiner and on completing the investigation a charge-sheet was submitted to the Court.

3. A charge under Section 18 of the Act was framed against the appellant which he denied and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined three witnesses. Inspector Sube Singh (PW 1) is the Investigating Officer who had conducted the search of the appellant and had allegedly recovered the opium from his bag. Head Constable Tejinder Singh (PW 2) is M.H.C. Malkhana with whom case property was deposited on 18-8-1993 by Inspector Sube Singh. On 18-9-1993 he had sent the sealed parcel to the office of the Chemical Examiner through Constable Sukhdev Singh. A.S.I. Jagir Singh (PW 3) was a member of the police party and a witness to the search and recovery. Arjan Singh the public witness was given up as having been won over. Ex. PFan affidavit of Constable Sukhdev Singh and Ex. PH the report of the Chemical Examiner were tendered in evidence.

4. In this examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellant denied the allegations of the prosecution and pleaded his false implication for the reason that his brother Sarwan Singh was wanted in certain cases by C.I.A. Staff Gurdaspur, that he was kept in illegal confinement for 18 years so as to coerce him to procure the presence of his said brother and thereafter he was implicated in this case by planting the said opium. He has examined three witnesses in his defence. Dhian Sing