In cases involving stringent penal consequences under the Act, the prosecution must ensure strict compliance with mandatory procedural requirements for search, seizure, sampling, and safe custody. Failure to produce seized contraband as material evidence or substantial gaps in the chain of custody vitiate the prosecution's case.

Judgment on Board

Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19/03/2020 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act 1985, Kondagaon District Kondagaon (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case (NDPS Act 1985) No. 57/2018, whereby the learned Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:-

1. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on 25.06.2018 at about 11:15 AM, Sub-Inspector Shashi Bhushan Patel (PW-8) received secret information that a truck bearing registration number AP-28-TD-2109 was illegally transporting Ganja. The secret information was recorded in the Rojnamcha Sanha. Thereafter, two witnesses, namely Deepak Gosai (PW-14) and Parmanand Nag (not examined), were called, and at 12:05 PM a Mukbir Suchna Panchnama (Ex. P/14) was prepared. The information was forwarded to the higher police authority, i.e., the SDOP, Kondagaon, vide Ex. P/9, and acknowledgment of the same was obtained from the SDOP’s office at 12:30 PM. After receiving this acknowledgment, a Panchnama for conducting search without a warrant (Ex. P/19) was prepared at 12:45 PM, and the police team thereafter proceeded to carry out the search and raid. The police intercepted the said truck on the road, and at about 1:20 PM (13:20 hrs) a notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was served upon the driver/appellant, vide Ex. P/21. The appellant gave his consent for personal search, which was recorded in Ex. P/22. Subsequent search of the truck resulted in the recovery of 50 packets of Ganja, as documented in Ex. P/26. Thereafter, at about 4:30 PM (16:30 hrs), the owner of a weighing machine, Ramlal Sahu (PW-13), was called to the spot, and in his presence the seized contraband was weighed. The weighing memo (Ex. P/33) was prepared at about 5:00 PM (17:00 hrs), showing the total weight of the Ganja to be 571.220 kilograms. A seizure memo (Ex. P/34) for the contraband was prepared at about 5:15 PM (17:15 hrs), and the documents of the vehicle, as well as a mobile phone and cash amount, were seized vide Ex. P/35. A Dehati Nalishi was recorded on the spot at about 5:50 PM (17:50 hrs), following which FIR was registered at the police station as Crime No. 42/2018 under Section 20(b) II(C) of the NDPS Act at about 6:06 PM (18:06 hrs), vide Ex. P/3. After completing the investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted before the competent court.

2. In order to establish the charge against the appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses. The statement of the appellant under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was also recorded in which he denied the material appearing against him and stated that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case.

3. The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record proceeded to convict the appellant herein for the aforementioned offence and sentenced him as mentioned hereinabove against which this appeal has been preferred by the appellant-accused herein questioning the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence.

4. (A) Learned coun