GOPAL LAL GUPTA - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgement dated 8-7-94 passed by the learned Sessions Judge. Sri Ganganagar convicting the appellant Gurdev Singh under Section 8 read with Section 15 of the NDPS Act and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 10 years and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- : in default 6 months further R.I.
(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 18-5-93 PW 4 Kashi Ram, SI Police Station, Sadar, Sri Ganganagar received information from a 'Mukhbir' that a person was going towards Punjab taking powder of 'Posta' (Poppy). He therefore, went along with other police persons and two 'motbirs' on the Kachcha Rasta near Gunjal and there he found a Sikh Gentleman carrying one packet on his head and when accosted he disclosed his name as Gurdev Singh and told that he was having 'Posta'. Shri Kashi Ram took out a sample from the dried crushed capsules of Poppy and sealed the same. The remaining article was also sealed. Thereafter, a report was lodged at the Police Station, Sadar, Sri Ganganagar where a case was registered. Sample was sent to the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Rajasthan, Jaipur and the Chemical Examiner reported that the sample gave positive test for the presence of chief constituent of opium and the sample is of dried crushed capsules of poppy. The police after completing the investigation, submitted a challan. The accused denied having committed any offence. The prosecution examined PW 1 Bhajanlal, PW 2 Badri Ram, PW 3 Jogendra Singh, PW 4 Kashi Ram, PW 5 Bhagwan Singh and PW 6 Makhan Singh. The learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as above.
(3.) Arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and the learned P.P. appearing for the State respondent have been heard and record perused. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is three-fold :- (i) Shri Kashi Ram was not empowered to make seizure and arrest the accused; (ii) It is not proved on record that the sample remained intact till it reached the FSL; (iii) The motbirs have not supported the recovery of contraband article from the accused and there are material contradictions in the statements of the two police officers. ;