Hon’ble Bharat Bhushan, J.—This criminal appeal is directed against the judgement and order of conviction dated 7.6.2008 passed by Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Kannauj in Special Trial No. 5 of 2007 (State v. Ramesh Chandra), arising out of Crime No. 639 of 2007, under Section 21/22 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (In short N.D.P.S. Act) P.S. Kannauj, District Kannauj whereby the appellant has been found guilty and convicted under Section 21/22 of N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years alongwith fine of Rs. One lac with default stipulation.

2. The prosecution story as unfolded before the Trial Court is that on 17.4.2007 at about 17.15 hours, a secret information was received by Sub inspector and In-charge SOG Virender Kumar Yadav, S.I. Kaushal Kishore Chaudhary, Constable Munna and others while they were busy in their picket duty that two persons are roaming on Bajaj Platina motorcycle and are likely to sell the suspicious material. Acting on the said information, the S.I. Virejdra Kumar Yadav requested the passers-by to join the investigation but none agreed and thereafter the police team came near Railway Station Kannauj City alongwith informer. There, they apprehended the accused persons at the instance of informer at about 6 p.m. On inquiry, they revealed their name as Ramesh Chandra (appellant) and Udhan. Accused admitted possession of a packet containing heroine. They were told that if they desire, they could be searched in the presence of any nearest Magistrate or any gazetted officer. On this, appellants stated that they are ready to get themselves searched by the arresting officials. Thereafter, the appellant Ramesh Chandra was searched. He was having a polythene bag in his right hand from which about 450 grams of heroine was said to have been recovered. No separate recovery was made from the co accused Udhan. Necessary procedure of drawing samples and sealing was followed and recovery memo (Ex-Ka-1) duly prepared. Thereafter a case was registered on 17.4.2007 at 20.40 hours at P.S. Kotwali Kannauj, District Kannauj. One sample was sent for chemical examination on 27.6.2007 and the chemical examiner found it to be heroine. On this basis, the charge-sheet (Ex-Ka-3) was filed against the accused persons under Section 21/22 of NDPS Act.

3. Learned Sessions Judge framed the charges against the accused persons on 28.7.2007 under Section 21/22 of N.D.P.S. Act. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, prosecution examined as many as six witnesses namely Sub Inspector Kaushal Kishore Chaudhary, P.W.-1, Sub Inspector Virendra Kumar Yadav, P.W.-2, Sub Inspector Vishram Singh, P.W.-3, Constable Raj Kumar, P.W.-4, Sub Inspector Sheikh Ahmad, P.W-5 and Sub Inspector Shiv Prasad Yada, P.W.-6.

4. Accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the prosecution case and contended that no recovery was made from them. The accused, however, did not adduce any evidence in their defence.

5. Learned Sessions Judge after considering the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the prosecution has been able to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the Trial Judge convicted the appellant Ramesh Chandra for the offence under Section 21/22 of NDPS as aforesaid and simultaneously acquitted the other accused Udham. Feeling aggrieved, this appeal has been filed by the appellant Ramesh Chandra.

6. Contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that accused had been wrongly implicated in this case and that the learned Trial Court failed to properly appreciate the evidence on record. According to him, the prosecution had failed to comply with the mandatory provision of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, vitiating the trial. Merely giving an offer or option to the appellant would not cover the mandatory requirements of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. In this regard, reliance has been placed by the appellant on the case of Vija