J U D G M E N T

: SUNITA GUPTA, J.

1. Vide this common judgment, I shall dispose of two criminal appeals bearing Crl.A. No.60/2011 & Crl.A.No.970/2011 filed by Rajveer @ Millar and Rajiv Grewal respectively challenging the common judgment dated 8.10.2010 and order on sentence dated 11.10.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohini Courts in Sessions Case No. 170/2008 whereby the appellants were convicted for offence under Section 20 NDPS Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.1 lac each and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

2. The prosecution case in nutshell, is that on 28.02.2008 at about 2PM, a secret information was received by SI Satish Rana that two persons namely appellants Rajiv and Rajveer, both residents of Bamla Village, District Bhiwani, Haryana, who indulge in supply of charas alongwith their associates Sethi and Ramesh, in Delhi and Haryana would come near Ghevara Mor at the corner of the Indane Gas plant between 4:30 PM to 5PM to supply huge quantity of charas to someone. The secret informer was produced before the SHO Insp. M.C.Katoch and on the directions of the SHO, SI Satish Rana formed a raiding party consisting of himself, Constable Sanjeev, Head Constable Om Prakash, Head Constable Jagdish Prasad and Constable Praveen. Raid was conducted. Raiding party reached the spot at about 4:15 PM and at about 4:35 PM, both the appellants were seen coming towards the Gehwara Mor and were carrying plastic kattas on their right shoulders. Raid was conducted and both the appellants were apprehended. Mandatory provisions of NDPS Act were complied with. From possession of Accused Rajiv, 23 kg of charas was recovered and from possession of Accused Rajveer, 22 kg of charas was recovered. The required samples were taken and accused persons were thereafter arrested. The samples sealed were sent to FSL on 7.03.2008 and as per report Ex.PX, the same were found to be charas. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused persons.

3. Both the accused were charged for the offence punishable u/s 29 NDPS Act, Section 20 NDPS Act and in the alternative u/s 22 NDPS Act to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. In order to substantiate its case, prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses. Statement of both the accused persons were recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C., wherein they denied the entire evidence and pleaded innocence. They further stated that they were lifted from their respective houses and were falsely implicated in this case and claimed that nothing was recovered from them. However, they did not lead any evidence in their defence.

5. The learned Special Judge on appreciation of evidence on record convicted and sentenced the appellants, as mentioned above. Appellants were acquitted of the charge u/s 29 NDPS Act as no evidence was brought on record to prove factum of conspiracy.

6. Counsel for the appellants submitted that instead of addressing oral arguments, they will submit written submissions. Vide order dated 25th February, 2016, they were directed to file written submissions within one week but till date same has not been filed. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State supported the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court and submitted that the same does not warrant interference. I have gone through the grounds of appeal and will decide the appeals on the basis of the same.

7. Broadly speaking, the impugned judgment was challenged, inter alia on the following grounds:-

(i) No effort was intentionally made by SI Satish Rana to join independent person in investigation from a stable place.

(ii) There is no eye witness or any public witness regarding the recovery of the alleged contraband from the appellants which clearly casts a doubt on the prosecution version in submitting that the contraband was recovered from the possession of the appellants.

(iii) There is inordinate dela