IMPORTANT POINT
Independent Witness--Prosecution story cannot be thrown out merely because independent witnesses was not examined being won other by accused.

Sham Sunder, J.:- This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 15.9.2003, and the order of sentence dated 16.9.2003, rendered by the Judge, Special Court, Bathinda, vide which he convicted the accused/appellant (Rishal Singh), for the offence, punishable under Section 18 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, for having been found in possession of 3 kgs. Opium, without any permit or licence. The trial Court, however, acquitted Daulat Ram S/o Ghisa Ram, accused.

2. The facts, in brief, are that on 5.9.2000, Balwinder Singh, Inspector, alongwith other police officials, was going in a Govt. Canter, towards Village Sheikhu, in connection with patrol duty, and holding a picket, and when the said police party reached at Bagha road, near railway crossing, Sukhpal Singh @ Pala, public witness, met it, who was joined with it. Thereafter, the police party held a picket at unmetalled path, leading from Seikhu to Phulo Meharanwali, in the area of Village Seikhu, at the bridge of canal minor. From the side of Phulo Meharanwali, a jeep bearing No.HR-20-B-5220, of green colour, came there, and it was signalled to stop. It was stopped. On seeing the police party, the driver of the jeep got puzzled, tried to get down from the same, and was apprehended by encircling him. He disclosed his name as Daulat Ram, and the other person, who was sitting in the jeep, disclosed his name as Rishal Singh. A cloth bag of blue colour, was found lying, in the feet of Rishal Singh. The Investigating Officer, suspected that some contraband was lying in the bag. The search of the bag, was conducted, in the presence of Raghbir Singh Chahal, DSP, who was called to the spot, by sending a wireless message, as a result whereof, recovery of 3 Kgs. opium therefrom, was effected. A sample of 50 grams, from the bag, was taken out, and the remaining opium, was kept into a separate container. The sample, and the container, containing the remaining opium, were converted into parcels, duly sealed, and taken into possession, vide a separate recovery memo. Ruqa was sent to the Police Station, on the basis whereof, formal FIR was registered. Rough site plan of the place of recovery, was prepared. The statements of the witnesses, were recorded. The accused were arrested. After the completion of investigation, the accused were challaned.

3. On appearance, in the Court, the copies of documents, relied upon by the prosecution, were supplied to the accused. Charge under Section 18 of the Act, was framed against them, to which they pleaded not guilty, and claimed judicial trial.

4. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined Dhani Ram, HC (PW-1), Raghbir Singh Chahal, DSP, (PW-2), Wazir Chand, Clerk, (PW-3), and Balwinder Singh, Inspector (PW-4). Thereafter, the Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State, closed the prosecution evidence.

5. The statements of the accused, under Section 313 Cr.P.C., were recorded, and they were put all the incriminating circumstances, appearing against them, in the prosecution evidence. They pleaded false implication. They, however, examined Sukhpal Singh, (DW-1), in their 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 Rishal Singh, accused, whereas, acquitted Daulat Ram, 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 appellant (Rishal Singh).

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

9. The Counsel for the