Non-compliance or delayed compliance with Section 52-A of the NDPS Act constitutes a procedural irregularity that does not per se vitiate a trial or render evidence inadmissible, provided the chain of custody remained intact and no serious prejudice is caused to the accused.

*****

Meenakshi I. Mehta, J.

Both the above-captioned Criminal Appeals are being taken up together for discussion and adjudication as these have arisen out of the same judgment and order on sentence, handed down by learned Judge, Special Court, Ferozepur (for short ‘the trial Court’), on 01.04.2014 in the criminal case arising out of FIR No.09 dated 24.01.2013 registered at Police Station Lakho Ke Behram, under Sections 21, 25 & 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the Act’), whereby appellants Malkiat Singh and Rajjo Bai have been held guilty for committing the offence punishable under Section 21 of the Act and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 12 years and pay a fine of Rs. one (01) lac each and in case of default in payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 06 months.

2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts, culminating in the filing of instant appeals, are that on 24.01.2013, Inspector/SHO Gobinder Singh, along-with some other police officials, was present at Bus Stand in the area of Village Karma, in connection with patrolling duty and for checking the suspected persons. There, he received a secret information that appellant Malkiat Singh had been indulging in smuggling of heroin from Pakistan and he had received total fourteen (14) packets from the smugglers on Indo-Pak Border and six (06) packets of heroin had already been recovered from him during the previous week and eight (08) packets had been kept concealed in his house and his wife, i.e appellant Rajjo Bai, was having knowledge of the same and on her interrogation, the afore-said contraband could be recovered from her possession. On receipt of this information, a ‘ruqa’ was forwarded to the police station for registration of the case. Sh. Baljit Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Guru Har Sahai, was requested to arrive at the spot and he met the police party at the outskirts of the village. Then, they reached at the house of the appellants and appellant Rajjo Bai was found present there. After disclosing his identity, the above-named DSP informed her (Rajjo Bai) that she was required to be interrogated and she could opt for the same in presence of any other Gazetted Officer but the afore-said appellant reposed faith in him vide Consent Statement Exhibit PF. During her interrogation, she disclosed that eight (08) packets of heroin were kept near the ‘Killa’ (peg for tethering cattle) by digging the earth and this fact was in her exclusive knowledge and she could get those packets recovered. Then, in pursuance of her disclosure statement Exhibit PG, she got the said packets of heroin recovered from the disclosed place. Two (02) samples, each weighing 05 grams, were separated out from each packet and these samples, along-with the remaining heroin in these packets, which weighed 990 grams each, were sealed with the seals bearing impressions ‘GS’ and ‘BS’. Specimen seal was prepared on Form M-29. Appellant Rajjo Bai was arrested. Site-plan was prepared and the statements of witnesses had also been recorded. While returning from the spot, the police party met SI Gurjant Singh, SHO Police Station Mamdot, at Village Murkwala and the entire case property as well as appellant Rajjo Bai and the witnesses were produced before him and on verification of facts of the case, he (SI) sealed sixteen (16) sample parcels and eight (08) bulk parcels with his own seal having impression ‘GS’. Further necessary investigation was, then, carried out and on