JUDGMENT : Rajiv Sharma, J. 1. This appeal is instituted at the instance of the State against the judgment dated 5.9.2013, rendered by the learned Special Judge Kullu, H.P. in Sessions trial No. 22/2011, whereby the respondent-accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused), who was charged with and tried for offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the ND & PS Act), has been acquitted. 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that on 24.1.2011, the police party headed by SI Krishan Chand, in charge PP Manikaran had gone towards Hurludhar for Nakabandi. At 4:30 PM, the police party saw accused Dassi Devi along with other co-accused Hiro Devi (now dead). Hiro Devi was ahead of accused Dassi Devi carrying one pink coloured bag in her hand. After noticing the police party, she handed over the bag to accused Dassi Devi. Both the accused turned back and tried to run away. On suspicion, they were nabbed. I.O. apprised both the accused about their legal right to be searched either before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. The accused consented to be searched by the police. Thereafter, the bag of accused was searched in which six polythene bags containing black coloured substance was recovered. It was found to be charas. It weighed 1 kg 400 grams. The charas was put in carry bag and sealed in one cloth parcel which was sealed with nine seals of seal “K”. The IO filled in the NCB-I form in triplicate. IO prepared rukka and sent the same to the Police Station through HHC Uttam Chand, upon which, FIR was registered. I.O. produced the sealed parcel along with NCB-I form and other relevant documents before the SHO Sher Singh for resealing. SHO resealed the parcel with nine seals of seal “S”. He also filled in relevant columns of NCB-I form. On 26.1.2011, MHC sent the case property to FSL Junga through Const. Tarsem Lal who deposited the same at FSL Junga on 27.1.2011. The investigation was completed and the challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. 3. During the course of prosecution evidence, co-accused Hiro Devi expired and proceedings against her stood abated. The trial was concluded against accused Dassi Devi only. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as six witnesses. The investigation was completed and the challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. 3. During the course of prosecution evidence, co-accused Hiro Devi expired and proceedings against her stood abated. The trial was concluded against accused Dassi Devi only. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as six witnesses. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. According to her, she was falsely implicated. The learned trial Court acquitted the accused, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, this appeal. 4. Mr. M.A. Khan, learned Addl. Advocate General for the State has vehemently argued that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused. On the other hand, Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate for the accused has supported the judgment of the learned trial Court dated 5.9.2013. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for both the sides and have also gone through the judgment and records of the case carefully. 6. PW-2 HC Ram Krishan testified that on 24.1.2011 SHO Sher Singh deposited a cloth parcel stated to be containing a bag and charas weighing 1 kg. 400 grams. It was sealed with 9 seals of Seal-K and 9 seals of seal-S. Sample seals “K” and “S” NCB-I form in triplicate, photo copy of seizure memo and FIR were also deposited with him. He made entry at Sr. No. 6 in the relevant register vide Ext. PW-2/A. 7. PW-3 SHO Sher Singh testified that on 24.1.2011, rukka Ext. PW-3/A prepared by SI Krishan Chand was received in the Police Station through HHC Uttam. FIR Ext. PW-3/B was registered. On the same day, SI Krishan Chand produced before him a parcel stated to be containing 1 kg. 400 grams of charas sealed with 9 seals of seal “K” along with NCB-I form, sample seal “K” seizure memo and other relevant documents. He resealed the same with 9 seals of seal “S”. He also filled in relevant columns of NCB-I form. Sample seal “S” was also drawn on cloth pieces. 8. PW-4 HHC Uttam Chand testified that on 24.1.2011, the police party headed by SI Krishan Chand had gone towards Hurludhar. At 4:30 PM, they saw two ladies with children coming from Jai nullah towards Kasol. The lady ahead of other lady was carrying one violet coloured bag in her hand. Sample seal “S” was also drawn on cloth pieces. 8. PW-4 HHC Uttam Chand testified that on 24.1.2011, the police party headed by SI Krishan Chand had gone towards Hurludhar. At 4:30 PM, they saw two ladies with children coming from Jai nullah towards Kasol. The lady ahead of other lady was carrying one violet coloured bag in her hand. On seeing the police party, she handed over the bag to other lady who was following her. They turned back. They were nabbed. The IO apprised both of them of their legal right to be searched either before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. They consented to be searched by the police vide memo Ext. PW-4/A. It was signed by him and LC Ram Kali as witnesses. The carry bag was searched. It contained charas. It weighed 1 kg. 400 grams. The sealing proceedings were completed on the spot. Rukka was prepared vide Ext. PW-3/A. It was sent through him to the Police Station. In his cross-examination, he deposed that when the police party saw accused Dassi Devi, there was nothing in her hands. She was only carrying a child. Volunteered that initially, there was nothing in her hand but subsequently, the bag was handed over to her by Hiro Devi. Hiro Devi was 1-2 steps ahead of Dassi Devi. Both the ladies were carrying their respective children on their back. The children were between the age of 1-2 years. 9. PW-5 SI Krishan Chand testified the manner in which the accused were apprehended and the charas was recovered from the bag carried by accused Dassi Devi. All the codal formalities were completed on the spot. Rukka Ext. PW-3/A was prepared and sent to the Police Station through HHC Uttam Chand. He also filled in the NCB-I form. He handed over the case property to SHO Sher Singh for re-sealing. In his cross-examination, he deposed that the spot was on the Manikaran-Bhunter road. When the accused were nabbed, no vehicle crossed the spot. After half an hour, the vehicles had crossed the spot. He did not know that there was private or government bus after every 15 minutes either from Bhunter to Manikaran or Manikaran to Bhunter. He further deposed that Hiro Devi had tried to run away by taking 3-4 steps. Hiro Devi was going about two steps ahead of Dassi Devi. After half an hour, the vehicles had crossed the spot. He did not know that there was private or government bus after every 15 minutes either from Bhunter to Manikaran or Manikaran to Bhunter. He further deposed that Hiro Devi had tried to run away by taking 3-4 steps. Hiro Devi was going about two steps ahead of Dassi Devi. Initially there was no bag in the hands of Dassi Devi. 10. PW-6 LHC Tarsem Singh has taken the contraband to FSL Junga vide RC No. 19/2011. 11. It is evident from the statements of PW-4 HHC Uttam Chand and PW-5 SI Krishan Chand that initially the carry bag was carried by Hiro Devi but after seeing the police, the same was handed over to Dassi Devi. The accused tried to run away, however, they were nabbed. The charas was recovered from the bag. It weighed 1 kg. 400 grams. All the codal formalities were completed on the spot. Rukka was taken to the Police Station, on the basis of which, FIR was registered. There are no major contradictions in the statements of PW-4 HHC Uttam Chand and PW-5 SI Krishan Chand. The accused were apprised of their legal right to be searched either before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer, though the charas was recovered from the bag. 12. The charas was put in one sealed cloth parcel and the same was sent to FSL Junga. The I.O. put the charas in the carry bag and the carry bag was sealed in a cloth parcel with nine seals of seal impression “K”. The case property was produced before SHO Sher Singh, who resealed the same with nine seals of seal impression “S”. The case property has reached FSL Junga intact. 13. The report of the FSL, Junga is Ext. PA. The quantity of resin found in the exhibit was 43.75%. It is clear from the report Ext. PA that one sealed cloth parcel bearing nine seals of seal “K” and nine seals of seal “S” was received from the forwarding authority intact and the seals tallied with specimen seal and seal impression impressed on the NCB-I form. The parcel was kept in the safe custody. The learned trial Court has come to the wrong conclusion that the accused Dassi Devi was not carrying the bag. The parcel was kept in the safe custody. The learned trial Court has come to the wrong conclusion that the accused Dassi Devi was not carrying the bag. The fact of the matter is that initially Hiro Devi was carrying the bag but after seeing the police party, it was handed over to accused Dassi Devi. The bag was recovered from the possession of Dassi Devi. Accused Dassi Devi was accompanying Hiro Devi. 14. The learned trial Court, has also relied upon the decision in the case of Sunil vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and other connected matters, reported in Latest HLJ 2010 (HP) 207, while acquitting the accused. This decision has been overruled by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of State of H.P. vs. Mehboon Khan and analogous matters, reported in Latest HLJ 2014 (HP) (FB) 900. The Full Bench of this Court has categorically held that there is no legal requirement of the presence of particular percentage of resin to be there in the sample and the presence of the resin in purified or crude form is sufficient to hold that the sample was that of Charas. It has been held as follows: “…………..The separated resin is cannabis resin not only when it is in ‘purified’ form, but also when in ‘crude’ form or still mixed with other parts of the plant. Therefore, the resin mixed with other parts of the plant i.e. in ‘crude’ form is also charas within the meaning of the Convention and the Legislature in its wisdom has never intended to exclude the weight of the mixture i.e. other parts of the plant in the resin unless or until such mixture proves to be some other neutral substance and not that of other parts of the cannabis plant. Once the expert expressed the opinion that after conducting the required tests, he found the resin present in the stuff and as charas is a resinous mass and after conducting tests if in the opinion of the expert, the entire mass is a sample of charas, no fault can be found with the opinion so expressed by the expert nor would it be appropriate to embark upon the admissibility of the report on any ground, including non-mentioning of the percentage of tetrahydrocannabinol or resin contents in the sample…………. (f) We are also not in agreement with the findings recorded by the Division Bench in Sunil’s case that “mere presence of tetrahydrocannabinol and cystolithic hair without there being any mention of the percentage of tetrahydrocannabinol in a sample of charas is not an indicator of the entire stuff analyzed to be charas” for the reason that the statute does not insist for the presence of percentage in the stuff of charas and mere presence of tetrahydrocannabinol along with cystolithic hair in a sample stuff is an indicator of the same being the resin of cannabis plant because the cystolithic hair are present only in the cannabis plant. When after observing the presence of tetrahydrocannabinol and cystolithic hair, the expert arrives at a conclusion that the sample contains the resin contents, it is more than sufficient to hold that the sample is of charas and the view so expressed by the expert normally should be honoured and not called into question. Of course, neutral material which is not obtained from cannabis plant cannot be treated as resin of the cannabis plants. The resin rather must have been obtained from the cannabis plants may be in ‘crude’ form or ‘purified’ form. In common parlance charas is a hand made drug made from extract of cannabis plant. Therefore, any mixture with or without any neutral material of any of the forms of cannabis is to be considered as a contraband article. No concentration and percentage of resin is prescribed for ‘charas’ under the Act.” 15. It has also come in the statement of PW-5 SI Krishan Chand that the place where the accused were apprehended was isolated and no vehicle had crossed at the spot. Thus, it was not possible to join the independent witnesses. The statements of PW-4 HHC Uttam Chand and PW-5 SI Krishan Chand inspire confidence. Thus, the prosecution has proved the case against the accused under Section 20 of the ND & PS Act. 16. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The judgment of acquittal rendered by the learned trial Court in Sessions Trial No. 22/2011 dated 5.9.2013 is set aside. Accused Dassi Devi is convicted under Section 20 of the ND & PS Act. The accused be produced for hearing on quantum of sentence on 20.8.2016. Production warrant be prepared accordingly and sent to the quarter concerned for execution, forthwith.