JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-Jose Luis Quintanilla Sacristan against the judgment and order dated 30.10.2017, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Maharajganj, in Special Case No.16 of 2015, arising out of Case Crime No.86 of 2015, Police Station-Sonauli, District-Maharajganj-convicting and sentencing the appellant for ten years R.I. and Rs.1,00,000/- fine (in default, imprisonment for six months) under Section 8 read with section 20 (b) (ii) (C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (herein after referred to as 'NDPS Act, 1985'), and for ten years R.I. and fine of Rs.1,00,000/-(in default, imprisonment of six months) under Section 8 read with Section 23 (C) of NDPS Act, 1985.

2. The relevant facts for disposal of this appeal are that on 15.2.2015, Sub Inspector-Ram Saran Yadav with Police Personnel of Police Station-Sonauli, Maharajganj and Sub Inspector-Raja Murad Ali of Seema Suraksha Bal (SSB) were on checking at India Gate situates at Indo-Nepal Border. They were jointly checking the people and vehicles. At about 14:10, a foreigner was seen by them taking a trolley-bag with him coming from the 'No Man's Land' after crossing the Nepal border. Police Personnel stopped him and started checking his bag, which the foreigner tried to avoid, but when his trolley-bag was opened and checked, 10 kg. of charaswas recovered from the bag in a plastic packet. On asking the foreigner, he told that he is Spanish and his name is Jose Luis Quintanilla Sacristan (the appellant) R/o Village-Street Dolores Lbarrliri No.5 ZA 33401 Aviles Astlirias Spain. The S.I. of S.S.B. Raja Murad Ali gave option to the accused-appellant speaking in English that if he desires so his search can be taken before any Gazetted Officer. On this option, he refused to opt and said that police personnel may take his personal search for which he gave his consent also in writing. First of all, police personnel took personal search of each other and after that accused was searched. Recovered charas was weighed by electrical weighing machine and weight of recovered charaswas found to be 10 kg. out of which 100 gm. of charas was separated as sample and after sealing it properly, it was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Varanasi, for chemical examination and rest of the substance was sealed separately. At the time of arrest of the accused and recovery of charas, public was there, but nobody was ready to become public witness. Information of arrest of the accused-appellant was given to her sister-Lushia Cutena in Spain on her Mobile No.0034985565980 and recovery-memo was prepared on the spot and the case under Section 8/20/23 NDPS Act, 1985, was registered against the accused-appellant at P.S.-Sonauli, District-Maharajganj.

3. Heard Ms.Mary Punch, learned Advocate, assisted by Mr.Mohd. Kalim, Shri Rajeev Kumar, learned Amicus Curie, Mr.B.A. Khan, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant, first of all, argued that in this case first information report is delayed, but it is not explained that how it was delayed. On perusal of chick-FIR, it is clear that accused was arrested on 15.2.2015 at 14:10 and on the same day, FIR was lodged at 16:45, i.e., after two and a half hour of the occurrence. After arresting the accused, recovery-memo was prepared on the spot and accused was brought to the police station, which was three km. north from the place of occurrence. Hence, there is no delay in lodging the first information report against the appellant.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that accused is a spanish-national, he does not know Hindi while consent letter is written in Hindi and it is clear that accused was unable to understand the language and the matter of consent letter. In fact, police had taken the signature of the accused on blank-paper and after that matter was written on that showing the consent of the a