Strict compliance with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, particularly Sections 42(2) and 50, is essential for the validity of search and seizure operations conducted by the police.

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J. - This appeal is directed against the conviction and the sentence imposed on the accused appellant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II) Jind in Sessions Case No. 49 of 1988 (Sessions Trial No. 51 of 1989) dated 23.1.1989.

2. According to the case of the prosecution, on 7.7.1988, the police party was present at the Bus Stand of village Uchana on patrolling duty. At that time, the Sub Inspector Bhim Singh S.H.O. of Police Station, Uchana received the secret information that one person named Diwan Chand son of Harbhagwan, resident of Jind was standing in the crowd of passengers with a suit case containing charas in his hand. On receipt of the said information, the Sub Inspector of Police apprehended the accused and the accused was asked whether he wanted to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Lambardar, but the accused desired to be searched there and then by the S.I./S.H.O. himself. Then S.I./S.H.O. searched the accused who was holding a brief case and from the same four packets of charas wrapped in a newspaper were recovered. The total quantity of charas was found to be 14 Kgs. 342 Gms. Out of the same 200 gms were taken as sample and the same was sealed and the remaining charas was kept in the suit case which was sealed by the Sub Inspector. The Sub Inspector sent a ruqa to the Police Station on the basis of which formal F.I.R. was registered. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused-appellant.

3. On the basis of the material placed before him, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions. After committal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge framed a charge against the accused for the offence under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as N.D.P.S. Act). The accused pleaded not guilty to the said offence and claimed to be tried.

4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined five witnesses and marked documents. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 Criminal Procedure Code and he stated that he was falsely implicated in the case.

5. On a consideration of the evidence on record, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused for the offence under Section 20 of the N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. one lac.

6. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the accused-appellant preferred this appeal.

7. PW-1 is a member of the Gram Panchayat of the village. He was examined since he was a chance witness for the recovery of the charas from the accused, but PW-1 turned hostile and stated that his signature were obtained in the Police Station when he went to the Police Station in connection with some dispute in his village. PW-2 was a Constable. According to him on 7.7.1988 he was with Sub Inspector/S.H.O. alongwith other Constable at the Bus Stand of Village Uchana. At that time, a person came and informed the Sub Inspector that one person named Diwan Chand was standing among the passengers and he was in possession of charas. Thereupon, the accused was apprehended and the Sub Inspector asked the accused whether he wanted to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or some Lambardar, but the accused offered to be searched there and then by the S.I. himself in the presence of the persons already present and the search resulted in recovery of four big packets containing charas in which four small packets of charas were found in each packet. Thus, according to him, there was 16 packets of charas in all and the total weight of the same was found to be 14 Kgs. 342 Gms. Out of the same, charas weighing 200 gms. was taken as a sample and the same was kept in a small Tin which was sealed. He further stated that PW-1, a Member Panchayat, was also present and he signed the recovery memo.

8. PW-3 is only a