The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of credible evidence to support a conviction under the NDPS Act, including adherence to procedural requirements related to search and seizure.

Uma Nath Singh, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal arises out of a judgment dated 24.12.2002 passed in Sessions Case No. 15/NDPS of 23.10.2002/2.7.2001 holding the appellant-accused guilty of offence under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotrpic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the "NDPS Act"), for having been found in conscious possession of 3 kgs. opium without a licence or permit.

2. The prosecution case, as set out in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the impugned judgment, on re-production reads as under :-

"that on 23.3.2001 S.I. Darshan Pal Singh (PW-5) accompanied by Head Constable Dayal Singh (PW-4), Head Constable Randhir Singh, Constable Baljit Singh and Raghbir Singh, was present on Ambala Jagadhri road near Kardhan turning, in connection with patrol and crime detection, when a secret information was received that the accused indulged in trading of opium and would be coming from the side of village Kardhan with the contraband. On this information a `Naka was laid and SHO, Police Station, Mahesh Nagar and Deputy Superintendent of Police Deep Ram were informed about this secret information through V.T. Message. Later secret information was reduced into writing as Ex. PH and submitted to the authorities. Pursuance to the said Naka, accused was spotted coming with a bag in his hand from the side of village Kardhan. Seeing Police party accused changed his direction and was apprehended on the basis of suspicion, when his identity was enquired into. Suspecting the accused carrying some contraband, notice Ex. PD was given to the accused, informing of his right to be searched before a gazetted officer or a magistrate. Vide option Ex. PD/1, accused opted to be searched before some gazetted officer or a magistrate. Upon reaching of DSP Deep Ram (since deceased) accused along with the bag were produced before him (DSP Deep Ram), who made enquiries from the accused and directed S.I. Darshan Pal (PW-5) to carry out the search. On search of the bag, which accused was carrying, opium was found wrapped in polythene, which on weighment came to 3 Kgs. Two representative samples of 50 grams each were taken out and put in plastic container, while remainder was put in the same bag and converted into sealed parcles with the seals of DSP and DR. Contraband along with samples were taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PE which was attested by witnesses. Accused could not produce any licence or permit. Ruka Ex. PC was sent to Police Station through Constable Raghbir Singh, on the basis of which formal F.I.R. Ex. PC/1 was recorded by ASI Ram Phal (PW-3). Investigating Officer handed over his seal after use to HC Dayal Singh (PW-4, while Deputy Superintendent of Police retained his seal with him. Accused was got medico-legally examined and brought to Police Station Mahesh Nagar, where he was produced before S.I. Jai Pal Singh (PW-6), Officer-Incharge of Police Station, Mahesh Nagar. Investigating Officer also prepared report Ex. PG under Section 55 of the Act and submitted the same before SHO. Investigating Officer had also prepared rough site plan Ex. PF of the place of recovery, PW-6 S.I. Jai Pal Singh SHO, after verifying the facts from the accused and witnesses affixed his seal of JP on all the parcels and made endorsement Ex. PG/1 on the report Ex. PG. Case property Ex. P-3 was deposited with Moharrir Head Constable and accused was put in the lock up. S.I. Jai Pal Singh (PW-6) submitted report under Section 57 of the Act, Ex. PJ to Superintendent of Police Ambala. Sample on being sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, on analysis was found to be opium vide report Ex. PK. Upon completion of investigation report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was prepared by S.I. Jai Pal Singh, Officer incharge, Police Station, Mahesh Nagar. On finding a prima facie case against the accused, charge under Section 18 of the N.D.P.S. Act was framed, to which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial."

Heard learned counsel for the parties and peru