JUDGMENT

Alka Sarin, J. - This is an appeal preferred by the appellant against a judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.02.2018 for commission of an offence punishable under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the NDPS Act"), sentencing the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 15 years and to pay a fine of rupees two lakhs and, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

2. The case as setup by the prosecution was that on 01.02.2015 ASI-Raghunath Singh (PW-2), the Investigating Officer, who was posted as CIA Staff, Jalandhar (Rural), and was present there, received a telephonic call from Inspector Angrej Singh, In-charge, CIA Staff, Jalandhar (Rural), that accused person in Case No. 11 dated 01.02.2015 under Section 21/61/85 of the NDPS Act, Police Station Kartarpur (Jalandhar), had suffered a disclosure statement that they had purchased heroine in the above-mentioned FIR from one Gurdev Singh son of Hira Singh, resident of Village Malluwal, PS Jhabal. It was further disclosed by the said accused person that on 01.02.2015 Gurdev Singh was to provide heroine to them in the afternoon. He further disclosed that the mobile number of said Gurdev Singh is 9855190338 and that he is wearing black coloured pants and grey coloured jacket. Inspector Angrej Singh asked ASI Raghunath Singh to lay naka immediately. ASI Raghunath Singh, after receiving the telephonic information, along with ASI Vijay Singh and other police officials, left in their official vehicle bearing registration number PB-65-9225 for village Sarai Khas. On reaching there, the police party noticed that one person was standing there. ASI Raghunath Singh stepped out of the vehicle and enquired the name of that person who disclosed his name as Gurdev Singh son of Hira Singh, the appellant in the present case. It was further stated by ASI Raghunath Singh that he checked the mobile number of the appellant herein and confirmed it to be the same as given to him by Inspector Angrej Singh.

3. Thereafter, following the procedure laid down in the NDPS Act, a search was carried out which led to recovery of one polythene bag (lifafa) from the front dab of pants of the appellant under the left pocket of jacket. The said polythene bag was found to be containing 1 Kg heroine in it.

4. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined PW-1 DSP Tarsem Singh, PW-2 ASI Raghunath Singh, PW-3 SI Surinder Pal Singh, PW-4 ASI Vijay Singh, PW-5 C Gurjit Singh, PW-6 HC Satnam Singh, PW-7 Inspector Angrej Singh and produced on record the documents i.e. Ex. P1 the non-consent memo, Ex. PA consent memo, Ex. PB the recovery memo, Ex. P2 Ruqa, Ex. P3 FIR, Ex. P4 endorsement on Ruqa, Ex. P5 Arrest-cum-Intimation Memo, Ex. P6 Personal Search Memo, Ex. P7 Site Plan and Ex. PY Report of Chemical Examiner.

5. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be referred to as "Cr.P.C.") was recorded in which all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence were put to him, with a view to seek his explanation thereon, which were denied as incorrect and the appellant pleaded false implication stating that no recovery has been effected from him.

6. The appellant, during interrogation, suffered disclosure statement Ex. P11 regarding the purchase of heroine from one Malkit Singh son of Sukhdev Singh, resident of Sarai Amanat Khan, District Tarn Taran. Said Malkit Singh was declared proclaimed offender and, accordingly, the proceedings were commenced against him. No supplementary challan was presented regarding the co-accused having been declared as proclaimed offender.

7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case with their able assistance.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant has raised the following arguments:-

(i) There is non-compliance of Section