JUDGEMENT Surinder Singh, J (Oral) Appellant hereinafter referred to as the “accused” was chargesheeted and tried for the offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, for short ‘the Act’ and sentenced to under imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of `70,000/- for allegedly keeping in possession of 630.36 grams of resin content of cannabis plant, 37.08% was in the recovered stuff of 1 kg. 700 grams. Hence the present appeal.(i) In nutshell, prosecution case can be stated thus. On 30.5.2009, at about 5.30 p.m. PW3 ASI Balbir Singh accompanied by H.C. Lal Chand, Constable Bheem Sen and Nanak Chand were confronted with the accused a Nepalese while going on foot on Ramsheela Tapu Bridge. On seeing the police, accused tried to escape but was over powered on suspicion. His identity and whereabouts were asked in the presence of PW1 Achhar Singh, who was associated by the police on the spot. Accused was carrying a bag (Ext. P3) in his hand. Police suspected that accused might be carrying narcotic with him as such gave him an option in writing Ext. PW1/B whether he wanted to be himself searched before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. He opted to be searched by the police party present on the spot. Thereafter ASI Balbir Singh aforesaid rendered himself to be searched by the accused but no incriminating article was found in his possession. To this effect memo Ext. PW1/C was prepared.(ii)Thereafter, PW3 ASI Balbir Singh conducted the search of the polythene bag to which the accused was carrying in his hand, it contained 1 kg 700 grams stuff in the shape of pancake. Out of the recovered stuff, two samples of 25 grams each were separated and sealed with seal impression ‘X’ at three places. The remaining bulk was also sealed with the same seal. Police filled in the NCB forms in triplicate, one of which is Ext. PW3/A. Facsimile of the seal was taken on the relevant column of the forms and the sample of seal was also drawn on a piece of cloth Ext. PW1/D. (iii) Case property was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ext. PW1/A in the presence of the witness which was duly signed by him. (iv) Ruka Ext. PW3/C was sent for the registration of the case which culminated into FIR Ext. PW1/D. (iii) Case property was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ext. PW1/A in the presence of the witness which was duly signed by him. (iv) Ruka Ext. PW3/C was sent for the registration of the case which culminated into FIR Ext. PW9/A. (v) Police also prepared the site plan Ext. PW3/B of the alleged place of recovery and recorded the statements of the witnesses. (vi) Accused was arrested. He was informed of grounds of arrest. (vii) Special report was sent to the D.S.P. Head quarters within the statutory period.(viii) Case property was produced before Inspector PW9 Prem Dass. It was re-sealed by him with seal impression ‘A’. Its facsimile was also taken on the NCB forms. He took the sample of seal used by him on a piece of cloth is Ext. PW9/B. He also filled in relevant column Nos. 9 to 11 of the NCB forms and handed over the case property to PW5 MHC Manoj Kumari along with sample of seal and NCB forms etc. (ix) PW5 MHC Manoj Kumari made the entry in the Malkhana Register with respect to the case property, extract of which Ext. PW5/A. (x)On 31.5.2009, one of the sample parcels was sent through PW6 constable Pritam Singh for its analysis to the forensic science laboratory, Junga which was taken by him vide R.C. Ext. PW5/B along with police docket containing NCB forms, sample of seals and copy of the FIR, which were received in the laboratory on 1.6.2009. On its examination, the Laboratory issued the examination report Ext. PW8/A to the effect that the sample parcel contained 37.08% W.W. resin of the cannabis plant and the sample was that of charas. 2. After completing the challan, it was presented in the court for the trial of the accused for the offence aforesaid. 3.Thereafter remaining bulk, seals, second sample which were in the custody of the police were also sent for the chemical examination to FSL Junga. It also tested positive. The report is Ext. PW9/C and supplementary challan was presented against the accused. 4.Finding a prima facie case against the accused, he was accordingly charge sheeted and tried for the said offence. At the end of the trial, he was convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. It also tested positive. The report is Ext. PW9/C and supplementary challan was presented against the accused. 4.Finding a prima facie case against the accused, he was accordingly charge sheeted and tried for the said offence. At the end of the trial, he was convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. 5.Shri Ravinder Thakur, learned counsel for the accused vehemently argued that the independent witness did not support the case of the prosecution and that there is no evidence on whose order remaining bulk and remaining sample were sent for the chemical examination. These facts cast doubt on the probity of the case of the prosecution. Thus, the statements of the official witnesses cannot be blindly acted upon. 6. On the other hand, Shri A.K. Bansal, learned Additional Advocate General supported the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence. 7. To appreciate the rival contention of the parties, re-appraisal of the evidence on record is necessitated. 8. As per the case of the prosecution, the police party got suspicious about the conduct of the accused as aforesaid thus apprehended him. This fact stands corroborated by PW3 ASI Balbir Singh, who was heading police party. The said police officer gave an option to satisfy the provisions of Section 50 of the Act but nothing incriminating material was found on the personal search of the accused. But however, charas was recovered from the polythene bag to which the accused was carrying in his hand. It was weighed and it turned to be 1 kg 700 grams. The sampling process was done, as stated above, on the spot in the presence of PW1 and each of the parcels were sealed with seal impression ‘X’ at three places. It was taken into possession vide seizure memo Ext. PW1 /A which also bears signatures of PW1 Achhar Singh. He was a Chowkidar in Municipal Committee, Kullu who met the police party on the spot. Though he stated that when he reached the spot, police had already apprehended the accused and they were weighing something. According to him, accused revealed his name in his presence and also stated that the police had opened said bag and charas was recovered in his presence, which was weighed and sealed in a parcel, though he did not remember the seal used. According to him, accused revealed his name in his presence and also stated that the police had opened said bag and charas was recovered in his presence, which was weighed and sealed in a parcel, though he did not remember the seal used. He was declared hostile and in cross examination, he admitted in all material particulars the story of the prosecution with respect to recovery and taking of the samples from the recovered stuff from the accused. He also admitted that all the parcels were sealed with seal ‘X’ at three places. He also identified the accused during the trial having been apprehended on the spot by the police. He admitted having signed parcel Ext. P1 and the sample of seal Ext. PW1/D which was used on the spot and refused the suggestion put on behalf of the accused that no charas was recovered from the possession of the accused. Therefore, his hostility, in any manner, cannot be used against the prosecution rather as already stated, he has corroborated the prosecution case in material particulars. 9. PW2 HC Lal Chand affords corroboration to the statement of the Investigating Officer. He was subjected to a lengthy cross-examination but nothing material in favour of the accused could be extracted. Prem Dass Inspector is a witness with respect to re­sealing of the case property and its deposit with MHC to which he testified. 10. PW5 is Manoj Kumari, MHC stated that one sample parcel alongwith sample of seals and NCB forms was sent for its analysis to forensic science Laboratory, Junga through PW6 Pritam Singh vide RC, as stated above. The link evidence in the instant case is complete. Although the SHO in the instant case stated that remaining bulk and the second parcel were also sent for the examination but there is nothing on record to show under whose orders these were sent. Although, the law does not permit taking prior permission from the Magistrate to carry out further investigation even after filing of the charge sheet. Although the SHO in the instant case stated that remaining bulk and the second parcel were also sent for the examination but there is nothing on record to show under whose orders these were sent. Although, the law does not permit taking prior permission from the Magistrate to carry out further investigation even after filing of the charge sheet. But however, whether the remaining bulk and the second parcel is sent for analysis to the Laboratory or not, would not effect the veracity of the prosecution case once it is proved that the sample of the charas, taken from the recovered stuff from the accused on the spot and sealed, thereafter sent for analysis and the link evidence from that point till its examination is complete. 11. There is nothing on record to show that said sample was tampered with at any point of time by any of the persons who handled it. In that event, when the link evidence is complete and there is no tampering, no dispute with respect to taking of the sample from the recovered stuff, then it can be said to be representative sample of the recovered quantity, which tested positive for Charas. 12. Otherwise also, I find that the testimony of the official witnesses is consistent and on close scrutiny worth inspiring confidence. Their testimony cannot be rejected solely on the ground that they are official witnesses. 13. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any error in the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court which entitles the accused for acquittal, as such the appeal filed by the accused is without any merit and is accordingly dismissed. ***********************************************************************