JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 8.12.94 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur, (Special Judge, NDPS Cases), who convicted the appellant for the offence under section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short the Act') and sentenced him to 10 years R.l. and a fine of Rs. 1.00 lakh and in default of fine, shall further undergo R.l. for two years. 2. Briefly the relevant facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are, that on 24.8.92 at about 6 A.M. PW3 Ashok Kumar Saxena, Sub Inspector, Central Bureau of Narcotics (in short CBN) alongwith PW1 Shambhu Dayal, PW2 Bhagwan Singh, Sepoys, CBN checked Rajasthan State Roadways Transport Corporation's Bus No. RJ/14/P 1263, near Chomu Pulia, Jhotwara Road, Jaipur and found appellant Mangiiai in a suspicious manner, sitting on the rear side of the Bus on seat No.47. He therefore, disclosed his identity and asked the appellant as to whether he wanted to be searched in presence of any Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate or by him, whereupon the latter consented to be searched in presence of the bus driver and conductor, PW3 Ashok Kumar thereupon drew memo under section 50(1) of the Act (Ex.P1) and took search of the appellant in presence of motbirs PW5 Shive Narayan and PW6 Mahendra Singh, the driver and conductor of the said bus as also PW1 Shambhu Dayal and PW2 Bhagwan Singh. It is alleged that a long bag was found wrapped around his stomach by the appellant by a Niwar string. The said bag contained a thick white barsati (long packet) inside which there was a polythene bag containing opium which weighed 2.050 Kg. The appellant had no valid licence for possessing and transporting the said contraband. Two samples of 24 gms. each were drawn from the seized opium and those were separately sealed in two packets marked A1 and A2. The remaining contraband opium was also sealed in the said polythene packet in presence of the appellant and the said motbirs vide seizure memo Ex.R2. A bus ticket from Jaipur to Mukandgarh and rupees 26/- in cash were also recovered from the appellant vide seizure memo Ex.P3. The appellant was arrested. Memo of site plan Ex.P5 as also memo of the specimen marks of seal, Ex.P4 and seizure memo of the bus ticket Ex.R 6 were prepared. A bus ticket from Jaipur to Mukandgarh and rupees 26/- in cash were also recovered from the appellant vide seizure memo Ex.P3. The appellant was arrested. Memo of site plan Ex.P5 as also memo of the specimen marks of seal, Ex.P4 and seizure memo of the bus ticket Ex.R 6 were prepared. Shri A.K. Saxena thereafter submitted the First Information Report (Ex.P7) along with the appellant before PW4 Mahesh Kumar, Inspector, Preventive and Intelligence Cell, Narcotic Bureau, Jaipur on the same day, who in turn registered a case under section 8/18 of the Act. On the same day Mahesh Kumar (PW4) sent one sample of the contraband opium (marked A1) alongwith test memo having the fascimile seal impressions (Ex.P 10 & R11) to the General Manager, Government Opium & Alkaloid Works, Neemuch (MP) through a registered insured parcel vide postal receipt (Ex.P9). After chemical examination the Assistant Chemical Examiner, Govt. Opium and Alkaloid Works, Neemuch, (MP) vide his report dated 15.10.92 (Ex.P12) opined the said sample contained 8.2% Morphine, and, as such, the said sample was opium within the meaning of Section 2(xv) of the Act. After completion of investigation, criminal complaint was filed by the Inspector, Central Narcotic Bureau, Jaipur in the court of learned ACJM. No.7, Jaipur City, Jaipur, who in turn committed the case to the learned Sessions Judge (Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Jaipur). 3. To prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as six witnesses. The appellant in his statement under section 313 Cr.RC. denied all the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence. However, he admitted that he was arrested by the Sub Inspector, Narcotic Bureau. In rebuttal he did not adduce any evidence. After trial, the learned Special Judge, by his impugned judgment found the appellant guilty for the offence under section 8/18 NDPS Act and sentenced him in the manner detailed ad ultra. 4. I have heard Shri Jinesh Jain, the learned Amicus Curiae and Shri R.S. Agarwal the learned Public Prosecutor, at length and carefully perused the record of the trial court in extenso. 5. Shri Jinesh Jain has strenuously canvassed that in this case, as per statements of PW5 Shiv Narayan and PW6 Mahendra Singh, the driver and the conductor of the Roadways bus; PW.1 A.K. Saxena, Sub Inspector, Central Bureau Narcotics had taken away the appellant to his office situated at a distance of about 2 kms. 5. Shri Jinesh Jain has strenuously canvassed that in this case, as per statements of PW5 Shiv Narayan and PW6 Mahendra Singh, the driver and the conductor of the Roadways bus; PW.1 A.K. Saxena, Sub Inspector, Central Bureau Narcotics had taken away the appellant to his office situated at a distance of about 2 kms. from the place, where the search of appellant was conducted and prepared the various memos there and procured their signatures thereon, while, as per testimony of PW3 A.K. Saxena and PW1 Shambhu Dayal and PW2 Bhagwan Singh; after apprehending the appellant, his search was taken on the spot and that various documents were also prepared then and there, which were signed by the said driver and conductor of the bus. Thus, the statements of the witnesses are inconsistent regarding the place where various memos were prepared, which makes the prosecution story highly suspicious and doubtful. 6. I have carefully perused the statements of PW3 A.K. Saxena, PW1 Shambhu Dayal, PW2 Bhagwan Singh, PW5 Shiv Narayan and PW6 Mahendra Singh. All these witnesses have consistently stated that Roadways bus no RJ 14/P/1263 were checked at the bus stop on Chomu Pulia on Jaipur-Sikar road at about 6.00 A.M. on 24.8.92, that the appellant was found sitting on seat No.47 on the rear side of the bus, that A.K. Saxena asked him as to whether he wanted to get his search conducted in presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate, whereupon the latter consented to give his search in presence of the driver and the conductor of the bus and that thereupon the appellant was taken out from the bus and his search was conducted. PW3 A.K. Saxena has further deposed that he prepared the Fard Panchnama Ex. R1, wherein it has been specifically mentioned that the appellant had consented to give his search to the said Sub Inspector in presence of the driver and the conductor of the bus. This Fard Panchnama bears the signature of the said bus driver and conductor as also PW1 Shambhu Dayal and PW2 Bhagwan Singh, Sepoys of CBN. R1, wherein it has been specifically mentioned that the appellant had consented to give his search to the said Sub Inspector in presence of the driver and the conductor of the bus. This Fard Panchnama bears the signature of the said bus driver and conductor as also PW1 Shambhu Dayal and PW2 Bhagwan Singh, Sepoys of CBN. A.K. Saxena stated that when the search of the appellant was conducted, a dingy coloured long bag was found wrapped around the abdomen of the appellant, which was tied by Niwar strings, that inside long bag, there was another packet of thick Barsati', wherein there was yet another polythene bag, which contained contraband opium, weighing 2.050 Kgms. He further stated that he took two samples of 24 gms each from the said contraband opium and sealed those two packets and marked them as Ex. A1 & A2 on the spot in presence of the said motbirs. He stated that he prepared the seizure memo Ex.R2, the arrest memo of appellant Ex.P.3, memo of the specimen seal impressions Ex.R4, site plan Ex.P5 and the seizure memo of the bus ticket Ex.R6, which was found on the person of the appellant on the spot. PW1 Shambhu Dayal, PW2 Bhagwan Singh have fully corroborated the sworn testimony of A.K. Saxena and stated that the aforementioned documents were prepared then and there. PW5 Shiv Narayan and PW6 Mahendra Singh have also in most unambiguous, explicit and clear terms deposed that the search of the appellant was conducted on the spot after the latter was taken out from the bus and that from his possession opium weighing 2.050 Kgms was recovered, for which the latter did not possess any licence. They have stated that the appellant was taken from the spot to the office of the Central Bureau Narcotics and that there they had put their signatures on various documents. The learned trial judge has given detailed and sufficient reasons for ignoring this inconsistency. In my considered opinion this is a minor inconsistency, which has crept in due to the fact that the statements of PW5 Shive Narayan and PW6 Mahendra Singh were recorded after about 18 months of the incident. There is no valid reason to disbelieve the sworn testimony of PW1 Shambhu Dayal, PW2 Bhagwan Singh & PWS A.K. Saxena. Therefore, for this minor contradiction, the entire prosecution case can not be thrown over board. 7. There is no valid reason to disbelieve the sworn testimony of PW1 Shambhu Dayal, PW2 Bhagwan Singh & PWS A.K. Saxena. Therefore, for this minor contradiction, the entire prosecution case can not be thrown over board. 7. Another contention of Shri Jinesh Jain is that the seizure of contraband article was made in violation of the provisions of Section 50 & 55 of the Act, but this contention is not at all borne out from the evidence recorded in this case. In my considered opinion, the learned trial judge has discussed, analysed and evaluated the evidence in right perspective and has not committed any illegality either of fact or law in holding that the provisions of Sections 50 & 55 of the Act have not been offended. No other point was pressed before me in this case. 8. Hence for the reasons mentioned above, this appeal fails. The conviction of the appellant are hereby maintained. The appellant be informed accordingly through the Supdt. Central Jail, Jaipur.> Appeal not allowed. *******