Compliance with legal provisions, testimonies of official witnesses, and minor contradictions in testimonies should be carefully considered in drug-related cases.

JUDGMENT

N.S.Shekhawat, J. - Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction dated 01.03.2005 and order of sentence dated 02.03.2005, passed by learned Special Court, Kaithal, whereby the present appellant had been convicted under Section-15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of eight months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- along with default stipulation, the appellant had preferred the present appeal before this Court.

2. The brief prosecution story, as it emerges from the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C is that on 28.09.2001, Amar Nath SI along with other police officials was present at 'T' point Titram chowk and in the meantime, one Haryana Roadways Bus came from the side of Jind and stopped there. One Sikh gentleman alighted from the bus and was carrying a bag of red and blue colour on his left shoulder. He noticed the police party and started walking briskly on Hisar road. The police got suspicious and on suspicion, he was apprehended by the police officials. On enquiry by the police, he disclosed his name and address as Mohinder Singh son of Singara Singh, Labana Sikh, resident of Padta Bhoop Singh, Police Station Guhla, District Kaithal. Since there was a suspicion that he was carrying some narcotics substance, notice under Section 50 of the N.D.P.S Act was served upon him and was given an option as to whether he wanted to get his search conducted from a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. In reply to the said notice, the accused expressed his desired to get his search conducted from a Gazetted Officer. A consent memo was again prepared in this regard separately, which was thumb marked by the accused, whereas HC Rattan Singh and HC Manphool Singh signed the memo as witnesses. In the meantime, Pala Ram Sarpanch of Village Titram, reached at the spot and was apprised of the facts of the case. He was asked to join the investigation, however, he expressed his inability and left the spot. On this a telephonic message was sent to DSP Head Quarter and DSP Amir Singh along with his staff reached at the spot in a Government vehicle. The accused, witnesses and the case property were produced before him. The DSP made enquiries from them and verified the facts. On his asking, Amar Nath SI had taken the search of the bag of the accused. A small lock was there on the aforesaid bag and on instructions, the bag was opened and searched, poppy husk was found in two big polythene envelopes in the bag. On weighing, each polythene envelope was found to be containing 5 Kilograms of Poppy husk. From each polythene, two samples of 200 grams each were taken and the samples were separately converted into parcels and were duly sealed. The residue quantity contained in the polythene envelopes were put back in the same red and blue coloured bag and sealed with the seal of 'AS' and 'AN'. The seal after use was handedover to HC Rattan Singh and the specimen seal impressions were retained. After initial formalities, the case property as well as specimen seal impressions were taken into possession by the police vide separate memo. A ruqa was sent by hand to the police station for registration of the FIR and a formal FIR was recorded. On reaching the police station, the accused, the case property and witnesses were produced before Ram Chander Inspector, who also verified the facts of the case and affixed his seal 'RC' on both the samples and residue and directed the I.O. to deposit the same with the MHC. A report under Section 57 of the NDPS Act was prepared and was sent to the DSP, who forwarded the same to the SP.

3. After initial investigation, a final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C was prepared by the police. Even the report of F.S.L was received to the effect that the samples were identified as poppy straw (Choora Post).

4. Finding a prima facie case, the learned Trial Court ordered the framing of charge unde