JUDGMENT S.D. Gundewar. J. - This appeal under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the judgment and order dated 7-9-1991 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. Nagpur in Sessions Case No. 433/91, whereby he has convicted the appellant/accused under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act ("hereinafter referred to as the Act") and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years with a fine of Rupees One Lakh and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that on 21-3-1991 at about 11.10 A.M. P.S.L Gangaram Sakharkar (PW. 3) then attached to the Crime Branch. Nagpur left the office of Crime Branch along with his staff and necessary material for conducting raids in case of receiving any information about the narcotic drugs. An entry to that effect was made in the station diary. On way when he happened to be infront of Mominpura Chowki; he received an information that one long faced slim person aged about 35 to 36 years. named Abdul Rashid possessed and was clandestinely making sale of Charas by standing infront of Kadari Sadi Centre on Timki road. Having received the said information PSI Sakharkar fetched two panchas, namely. Dnyaneshwar Kadwe and Mohammad Jamir and apprised them of the sum and substance of the information received by him and after they agreed to act as panchas informed his superior official. A.C.P. Paraskar of Crime Branch. Nagpur about the same on phone and on obtaining oral permission from A.C.P. Paraskar for conducting the raid on the said person PSI Sakharkar- noted down the said information and proceeded "towards Kadari Sadi Centre for carrying out the raid. On reaching there-the raiding party noticed that a person of the description given in the information was present there. He was having a hand bag with him. He was encircled by the members of the raiding party PSI Sakharkar then disclosed his identity to the said person and asked him about his name and address. Thereupon the said person gave out his name and address as Abdul Rashid @ Mama s/o Mohammad Yusuf. resident of Bakra Mandi, Mominpura, Nagpur being the appellant/accused. The purpose of the raid was informed to the appellant. Thereupon the said person gave out his name and address as Abdul Rashid @ Mama s/o Mohammad Yusuf. resident of Bakra Mandi, Mominpura, Nagpur being the appellant/accused. The purpose of the raid was informed to the appellant. H e was also informed that he was entitled to have his personal search being taken either before any Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate to which the appellant showed no inclination. PSI Sakharkar and all the members of the raiding party including panch as then gave their personal searches to the appellant and thereafter personal search of the appellant was taken in the presence of panchas. In the course of his personal search two black coloured cakes of Charas wrapped in polythene paper and a sum of Rs. 900/-in cash were found in the hand bag which the appellant had with him. Total weight of Charas found with the appellant was about 320 Grams. Out of the same. 20 grams of Charas was taken as sample in one packet. The sample packet of Charas the packet containing remaining Charas and a sum of Rs. 900/- in cash were then seized, sealed and labelled separately. A detailed panchnama (Exh. 8) of the same was drawn on the spot. a copy of which was given to the appellant and his signature was obtained on the Panchnama in token of the receipt of its copy. The appellant was then taken to Tahsil Police Station along with the seized property, where PSI Sakharkar lodged his report (Exh. 14) in the matter on the basis of which an offence came to be registered as Crime No. 185/91. Before that PSI Sakharkar submitted his special report (Exh-15) to his superior officer. A sample of Charas was sent to Chemical Analyser, Nagpur for analysis and after completion of investigation. Charge sheet came to be filed in Sessions Court, Nagpur on 5-6-1991. 3. A charge (Exh. 3) was framed against the appellant under Section 21 of the Act to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. His defence was one, of total denial false implication. After conclusion of the trial, the Additional Sessions Judge found him guilty of the offence punishable under section 21 of the Act and convicted and sentenced him as aforesaid. 4. His defence was one, of total denial false implication. After conclusion of the trial, the Additional Sessions Judge found him guilty of the offence punishable under section 21 of the Act and convicted and sentenced him as aforesaid. 4. Shri M.R. Daga the learned Counsel for the appellant pointed out to us that there is serious infirmity as far as the quantity of sample of Charas collected and sent to Chemical Analyser for analysis and that was received by the Chemical Analyser for the said purpose according to Shri Daga, this is fatal to the prosecution and on this count alone, the prosecution must fail. 5. On perusal of the prosecution evidence on record we find considerable force in the aforesaid submission made by Shri Daga. The evidence of PSI Sakharkar (PW.3) indicates that he took about 20 grams of Charas out of the two cakes of Charas found with the appellant by way of sample. Requisition to Chemical Analyser (Exh. 18) also shows that a sample containing 20 grams of Charas was sent to Chemical Analyser for analysis while the report of Chemical Analyser (Exh. 19) clearly points out that quantity or Charas received by him for analysis was only 16 grams. This clearly indicates that there is discredpany in the quantity of charas collected by way of sample and sent to Chemical Analyser for analysis and the quantity that was received by Chemical Analyser for the said purpose. No explanation was put forth by the prosecution for the aforesaid discrepancy crept in the evidence of prosecution in this regard. However, it is submitted by Mr. A.,G. Mujumdar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for to the State, in this behalf, that though there is such discrepancy, it is not fatal to the prosecution as the difference between the quantity of sample collected and sent to Chemical Analyser for analysis and that was received by Chemical Analyser for the said purpose was very little prosecutions of the present type, where the evidence in respect of the identity of the contraband is very crucial. it needs to be emphasised that every aspect and. more importantly, the weight of the contraband, which is something that is one of the most important features on which it can be distinguished or identified, must be attended to with a degree of precision and with a degree of correctness. it needs to be emphasised that every aspect and. more importantly, the weight of the contraband, which is something that is one of the most important features on which it can be distinguished or identified, must be attended to with a degree of precision and with a degree of correctness. Any amount of laxity, looseness or error could have fatal consequences to the prosecution. Similar view has been taken by this Court in the decision in Amina Abdul v. State of Maharashtra1. 7. In the instant case, as we have observed above, there is discrepancy in the quantity of sample sent to Chemical Analyser for analysis and that was received by him for the said purpose and hence in our view there being serious infirmity in the evidence of the prosecution in this regard it is fatal to the prosecution. We are, therefore inclined to give the benefit of doubt to the appellant. 8. In view of the above discussion and under the facts and circumstances of the case, in our view, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has erred in convicting the appellant and therefore, the conviction of the appellant deserves to be quashed. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant are set aside. Fine if paid, is directed to be refunded. The appellant who is in jail is directed to be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. Appeal allowed. 1. 1994 B. Cr. C. 185 (Bom.)