JUDGMENT : Vivek Singh Thakur, J. 1. In the instant case appellant has assailed his conviction and sentence imposed upon him vide judgment dated 29.07.2015, passed in Sessions trial No. 4-N/7 of 2014 by Special Judge-II, Sirmaur, District at Nahan, H.P., Section 15 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered in case FIR No. 347/2013 in Police Station, Paonta Sahib, H.P. 2. During checking of vehicles by police in Nakabandi near Check Post Behral, appellant was found transporting 100 Kgs. poppy husk/poppy straw in five plastic bags in dicky of vehicle Indigo car with number plate UK-07AE-7839. Other number plates bearing No. DL- 4CR-7283 were also found in the car. Recovered contraband was seized and samples of the same were sent for chemical analysis to State FSL. As per Chemical Analysis report recovered contraband was found to be poppy straw. On completion of investigation, challan under Section 15 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was presented in the court against appellant and on conclusion of trial appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.1.00 lac and in default in payment of fine to undergo further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. 3. We have heard learned counsel for parties and also have gone through the material placed on record. 4. On 07.10.2013 at about 3.45 PM, Police Party headed by PW-14 ASI Mohar Singh consisting of PW-7 Head Constable Kalyan Singh, PW-8 Head Constable Sunil and PW-6 HC Tapender Singh departed Police Station Paonta Sahib towards Batapur Chowk Bahral Barrier etc. in Government vehicle bearing No. HP-17C-1222, being driven by HHC Varinder Singh for patrolling to detect offences under Excise and Forest Act. Copy of departure entry in Daily Diary Report is Ex. PW-10/A. Police Party was also accompanied by HC Dharam Singh, Incharge Security branch Paonta Sahib. They set up a =Naka' at Behral Check Post and started checking vehicles. List of vehicles checked during =Naka' was also prepared. Copy of said list is Ex. PW-14/A. 5. At about 5.30 PM, Indigo Car bearing No. UK-07-AE-7839 coming from Yamunanagar side was stopped by Police Party. On inquiry, driver of car disclosed his name Satish Kumar. They set up a =Naka' at Behral Check Post and started checking vehicles. List of vehicles checked during =Naka' was also prepared. Copy of said list is Ex. PW-14/A. 5. At about 5.30 PM, Indigo Car bearing No. UK-07-AE-7839 coming from Yamunanagar side was stopped by Police Party. On inquiry, driver of car disclosed his name Satish Kumar. On account of his gesture and also due to condition of vehicle suspicion arose and therefore constable Tara Dutt who was on duty at barrier, Mustak Ali an employee of Marketing Committee and Yaseen Ali, B.O. Forest Department was associated in search of vehicle and vehicle were searched in their presence. On opening of dicky of car powder like substance was found in 5 yellow colour plastic sacks. Appellant stated the said powder to be cattle feed. At the time of checking, plastic sacks, two number plates bearing No.DL-4CR-7283 were also found in dicky. Sealed plastic sacks were marked as Sl. No. 1 to 5 and opened in presence of witnesses. Powder in plastic sacks was found packed in transparent plastic panies. On tasting and smelling as well as on the basis of experience, police officials found it to be poppy husk. Identification memo of this substance Ex. PW-11/A was prepared. PW-8 HC Sunil brought electronic weighing scale from Hotel Grand Rivera in Government vehicle under instructions of PW-14 ASI Mohar Singh. On weighing each plastic sacks was found containing 20 Kgs. Poppy husk and total quantity of recovered contraband was found 100 Kgs. After mixing contraband homogenously, two samples of contraband one Kg each were taken out from every plastic sack and samples were put in separate cloth parcels and sealed with seal impression =T'. 5 plastic sacks were also sealed with seal impression =T'. Column Nos. 1 to 9 of NCB form Ex. PW-3/C were filled in triplicate and seal impression =T' was also embossed on the said form. Samples of seal impression =T' Ex. PW-14/B were also taken on separate piece of cloth. Photography and videography of proceedings was done by HC Kalyan Singh with Government camera. Seal after its use was handed over to PW-1 Yaseen Ali. PW-1 Yaseen Ali, Mustak Ali, PW-6 HC Tapender Singh and appellant signed memo. Ex. 1/C. Rukka PW-11/A was prepared and sent to Police Station, Paonta Sahib through PW-6 Tepender Singh. 6. On the basis of Rukka, Ex. PW-11/A, FIR Ex. Seal after its use was handed over to PW-1 Yaseen Ali. PW-1 Yaseen Ali, Mustak Ali, PW-6 HC Tapender Singh and appellant signed memo. Ex. 1/C. Rukka PW-11/A was prepared and sent to Police Station, Paonta Sahib through PW-6 Tepender Singh. 6. On the basis of Rukka, Ex. PW-11/A, FIR Ex. PW-11/B was registered. PW-11, Inspector Bhishan Singh Thakur made endorsement of FIR Ex.PW-11/C on Rukka and handed over case file to PW-6, Tapender Singh, who further handed over the said file to PW-14 ASI Mohar Singh. Spot map Ex.PW-14/D was prepared. Appellant was arrested after completion of formalities on the spot. Police party left for Police Station. Sealed plastic sacks and 10 samples of contraband alongwith NCB forms in triplicate and sample of seal =T' were produced before PW-11 Inspector Bhisham Singh Thakur, who resealed sample and recovered contraband with seal =A' and prepared reseal Memo PW-11/D. Seized vehicle alongwith number plates and key was also handed over to the Incharge Malkhana. 7. Special report Ex. PW-13/A was sent through PW-5 Constable Pardeep Kumar to SDPO Paonta Sahib which was received by PW-13 HC Tejinder Singh and produced before the then SDPO, Ranbir Singh Rathore who after perusing the same put his signature on it and entry in this regard was made in Register. 8. During investigation, screening report of vehicle UK-07AE-7839 was obtained form RTO Office Dehradun and it was found that this number pertained to Alto Car owned by one Dhirender Singh. Copy of screening report Ex. PW-14/F and details downloaded from internet are Ex. PW-14/G. On verification about the vehicle bearing No. DL 4CR-7223, it was found that against this number an Indgo car was registered in the name of Sanjay Sihna. However, on the address given at the time of registration of vehicle, no person named as Sanjay Sinha was found to be residing. Downloaded details of vehicle No DL 4CR-7223 are Ex. PW-14/H. 9. Samples were sent for chemical examination to State FSL Junga by PW-3 HC Narayan Singh, Incharge Malakhana through PW-4 Constable Vipin Kumar vide RC No. 149/13 Ex. PW-3/B. Samples were deposited in State FSL Junga on 10.10.2013 under receipt obtained on road certificate itself. As per Chemical analysis report Ex. PW-11/F recovered contraband was found to be poppy straw. 10. Prosecution examined PW-1 Yaseen Ali as independent witness who duly supported and corroborated prosecution story. 11. PW-3/B. Samples were deposited in State FSL Junga on 10.10.2013 under receipt obtained on road certificate itself. As per Chemical analysis report Ex. PW-11/F recovered contraband was found to be poppy straw. 10. Prosecution examined PW-1 Yaseen Ali as independent witness who duly supported and corroborated prosecution story. 11. PW-6 HC Tapender Singh, PW-7 HC Kalyan Singh, PW-8 HC Sunil and PW-14 ASI Mohar Sing are spot official witnesses examined in the Court. All of them corroborated prosecution case with slight insignificant variations. PW-2 Nirmal Sharma corroborated the fact of providing weighing machine to police. PW-3 HHC Narayan Singh Incharge Malkhana proved deposit of case property with him and sending samples to State FSL, Junga for chemical analysis and filling column No. 12 of NCB Form. 12. PW-4 Constable Vipin Kumar proved depositing sample of recovered contraband in State FSL, Junga. PW-5 Constable Pardeep Kumar proved handing over of Special report to PW-13 HC Tejinder Singh, Reader to SDPO and PW-13 HC Tejinder Singh proved placing Special Report before SDPO and signing the same by SDPO. 13. PW-9 HC Rajesh Kumar proved registration of FIR Ex. 11/B on receiving Rukka Ex.PW-11/A. PW-10 Deepak Chauhan proved DDR entry with regard to departure of police party on 7.10.2013. PW-11 Inspector Bhisham Singh proved resealing of case property and filling remaining columns of NCB Form in triplicate. 14. In statement under Section 313 of the code of Criminal Procedure, only defence taken by appellant was that police apprehended one person namely Kapil on the spot but he was released and recovered contraband was wrongly planted upon him. 15. Brother of appellant DW-1 Suresh Pal was examined as defence witness. He stated that they were members of joint family. On 13.10.2013, one constable and one ASI of Himachal Police went their house in their village and demanded driving licence of his brother Satish Kumar from him and he handed over the same to them in presence of his neighbour Rajiv. He admitted that Shubhlesh Kumari was wife of appellant and her mobile bearing No. 90453-48619. He further admitted that on 07.10.2013, police informed Subhlesh Kumari on her mobile about arrest of appellant in present case. No other evidence was led by appellant. 16. He admitted that Shubhlesh Kumari was wife of appellant and her mobile bearing No. 90453-48619. He further admitted that on 07.10.2013, police informed Subhlesh Kumari on her mobile about arrest of appellant in present case. No other evidence was led by appellant. 16. Learned counsel for appellant referred statement of PW-1 Yaseen Ali and raised doubt on his impartiality for admitting his cordial relations with police officials and for not saying that he was called by police and therefore only inference of joining police party at his own as interest person could be drawn. It is urged that PW-1 admitted that there were Tea stall, cold drink shop, wine shop and Toll Tax at a some distance from barrier but no one from these shops or Tall Tax barrier was called for associating in investigation but person having cordial relations with police officials was associated. Submission of learned counsel was not sustainable for the reason that there was nothing on record to impeach impartiality of this witness. To have cordial relations with police officials could not be basis for rejecting testimony of witness and for drawing inference that witness was not an independent witness. There is no enmity of PW-1 with appellant and also there was no personal interest of PW-1 Yaseen Ali for seeking conviction of appellant in a false case. PW-14 Mohar Singh specifically stated that constable Tara Dutt, Musthak Ali and PW-1 Yaseen Ali were called on suspicion for condition of vehicle and gesture of appellant. Omission by PW-1 to mention this fact in his deposition in the court was a minor discrepancy. There was no suggestion put in his cross examination that he was not called or associated by police but he joined police and participated in process with intention to implicate appellant in a false case. 17. Counsel for appellant referred admission of PW-1 that Investigating Officer did not call any independent witness from adjacent shops. But from this admission inference cannot be drawn at any stretch of imagination that PW-1 was not an independent witness. This question was with respect to calling of independent witnesses from adjoining shops. When witness was available on the spot there was no occasion to call independent witnesses from adjoining shops or a barrier situated as some distance. 18. It was also pointed out on behalf of appellant that PW-1 stated that remaining quantity of 80 Kgs. This question was with respect to calling of independent witnesses from adjoining shops. When witness was available on the spot there was no occasion to call independent witnesses from adjoining shops or a barrier situated as some distance. 18. It was also pointed out on behalf of appellant that PW-1 stated that remaining quantity of 80 Kgs. was sealed whereas after taking out 10 samples of one Kg. each out of alleged total quantity of 100 Kg. remaining quantity could have been 90 Kgs. Therefore doubt on prosecution case was raised. It was a minor mistake based on wrong calculation because in Rukka Ex. PW-11/A, it was stated that 5 bags having 18 Kg. contraband in each were sealed and seized. PW-1 Yaseen Ali stated that 100 Kg. Poppy was found in 5 bags weighing 20 Kg. of poppy husk in each bag. He further stated that from every bag two samples of 1 Kgs each were taken out. Therefore, his statement that 5 bags containing 80 Kgs. poppy husk were sealed by police was only miscalculations having no bearing on genesis of prosecution case. 19. Counsel for appellant further pointed out statement of PW-1 wherein he stated that he did not remember that which document was prepared by IO first and one or two documents were signed by him after going through contents and he did not know what was NCB form. It was further argued that when this witness did not remember documents prepared in his presence and did not know about NCB form, then statement of this witness lost its relevancy and signature of PW-1 over NCB form are of no significance. PW-1 specifically admitted preparation of documents PW-1/A, PW-1/B, PW-1/C in his presence and admitted signatures on these documents. Therefore, not remembering documents prepared did not vitiate or render evidence of PW-2 unreliable and documents irrelevant. So far NCB form was concerned, the same was neither filled nor signed by PW-1. Hence, ignorance of PW-1 about NCB form was insignificant. 20. Non production of original seal by PW-1 in the court was argued to be fatal for prosecution case. Therefore, not remembering documents prepared did not vitiate or render evidence of PW-2 unreliable and documents irrelevant. So far NCB form was concerned, the same was neither filled nor signed by PW-1. Hence, ignorance of PW-1 about NCB form was insignificant. 20. Non production of original seal by PW-1 in the court was argued to be fatal for prosecution case. Statement of this witness that he did not remember whether seal was of wood, iron or lead and seal impression affixed on samples and bags and also number of seal impression affixed on the same was also referred sufficient material for disbelieving prosecution case and it was contended that in absence of production of seal, it was not possible to compare seals affixed upon the contraband and samples which was fatal for prosecution case. Purpose of production of seal is to compare seal impression affixed on parcels of contraband at the time of recovery with case property produced in the court and also with parcels of samples sent to State FSL for chemical analysis. In absence of original seal, this comparison is possible with sample seal impression taken on clothes as well as on NCB form and it was done in present case with sample seal impression taken on cloth Ex. PW-14/B. Appellant failed to point out prejudice caused to him for non production of original seal in court. 21. Counsel for appellant also referred that PW-1 Yaseen Ali stated that police official informed him that these bags were recovered from the vehicle of appellant but he failed to notice next line in his statement wherein he specifically stated that search was conducted by police in his presence. Statement as a whole is to be read. Similarly another part of his statement was referred for disbelieving him in which he stated that it was correct that he put his signatures on documents on direction of police and one or two documents were singed by him after going through the contents and police officials did not explain contents of documents to him. This contention was also not sustainable because statement of PW-1 was to be considered as a whole and PW-1 did not dispute or deny contents of documents signed by him. 22. Non supply of documents in presence of PW-1 did not mean that documents were not supplied at all. This contention was also not sustainable because statement of PW-1 was to be considered as a whole and PW-1 did not dispute or deny contents of documents signed by him. 22. Non supply of documents in presence of PW-1 did not mean that documents were not supplied at all. Moreover even if it is considered that documents were not supplied, then also appellant has failed to point out document which was tempered by police and prejudiced caused to appellant. 23. Counsel for appellant referred statement of PW-1 in which he stated that he went back but police remained on spot for 3-4 hours and argued that after leaving spot, it was not possible for PW-1 to tell or notice time for which police remained on the spot. Counsel for appellant did not notice the fact that PW-1 was posted at Forest Check Post at Behral which was adjacent to police Naka. Therefore, it was possible for PW-1 to notice police party from the forest check post even after leaving spot also. There was no contradiction in his statement on this aspect. 23. It has been contended on behalf of appellant that bridging weighing machine from Hotel Grand Revera situated a distance of 4-5 Kms. from spot cast doubt on fairness of investigation as there were various Hotels, shops and factory near spot and also on the way from spot to Hotel Grand Revera wherefrom weighing machine could have been brought as PW-2 Nirmal Sharma stated that shop keepers in the way might be having such type of machines. In present case five huge plastic sacks containing total quantity of one quintal were found in the car of appellant. Perusal of Rukka PW-11/A reflected that PW-8 HC Sunil was sent for electronic weighing machine, from Hotel Grand Rivera in official vehicle in peculiar circumstances and also keeping in view the quantity of recovered contraband, to be weighed. Therefore there was nothing wrong in bringing electronic weighing machine having capacity to weigh recovered contraband, from a specific hotel which might be in knowledge of Investigating Officer. It was but natural to bring an instrument from a known place instead of making inquiry here and there for searching of weighting machine having capacity to weigh huge quantity of contraband. 24. It was but natural to bring an instrument from a known place instead of making inquiry here and there for searching of weighting machine having capacity to weigh huge quantity of contraband. 24. PW-2 Nirmal Sharma stated that there were Hotel, shops and factory at Bata Mandi and such type of weighting machines might be available with them. This averment was not suggesting that even this witness was sure about the availability of such type of machines in other places. Possibility of such machines with other shop keepers does not render bringing weighing machine from Hotel Grand Revera suspicious. Appellant failed to point out how bringing of weighing machine from Hotel Grand Revera had prejudiced him. Appellant also referred that there was no mention of NCB form in copy of RC Ex. PW-3/B vide which samples were taken to State FSL Junga and also there was no mention of sending NCB forms with samples in Col. No. 6 to 8 in Malkhana Register No. 19. Further, there was no mention in Register No. 19 regarding deposit of case property in State SFL Junga. It was further argued that receipt of State FSL was also not produced in the Court and therefore, it was not possible to compare seals on sample parcels with seals affixed at the time of recovery of contraband. This plea of the appellant was also misconceived. Receipt of sample parcels in State FSL Junga was endorsed on left corner of road certificate itself indicating that sample parcels were received in State FSL Junga on 10.10.2013 NCB form was also sent in triplicate to State FSL and the same was evident from report of State FSL Ex. PW-11/F in which it was mentioned as under:- ?6: Parcel (s) articles received: Five sealed cloth parcels alongwith docket, Xerox copies of FIR & Seizure memo; NCB forms in triplicate & sample seals of T&A (Total-08 leaves). 7: Description of the parcel: Five sealed cloth parcels marked as SA-I, SB-I, SC-I, SDI & SE-1, each bearing three seals of ?T? &three seals of ?A?. The seals were found intact and tallied with specimen seals sent by the forwarding authority and seals impressions impressed on the form NCB-I. The parcels were kept in the safe custody of the Assistant Chemical Examiner till the report of the same was signed & dispatched for Laboratory examination & report. 25. &three seals of ?A?. The seals were found intact and tallied with specimen seals sent by the forwarding authority and seals impressions impressed on the form NCB-I. The parcels were kept in the safe custody of the Assistant Chemical Examiner till the report of the same was signed & dispatched for Laboratory examination & report. 25. It was pointed out that PW-6 Tapender Singh stated that they did not check any car thereafter but reason for not checking any vehicle after apprehending vehicle of appellant was not explained. There is nothing abnormal in it as it was not a regular check post but a =naka' for detection for crime and after finding contraband in apprehended vehicle police party was involved in completing investigation and after completing cumbersome procedure and formalities related thereto police party left for police station. 26. Failure of PW-2 Nirmal Sharma stating exact name of police official who approached him requesting weighing machine was not fatal but natural in normal circumstances and indicated that witnesses was not tutored. 27. Plea of appellant that there is non compliance of Section 42 (2) of NDPS Act, on the basis of departure report Ex. PW-10/A, is also not sustainable as PW-10 Deepak Chauhan clarified that meaning of =Surag Burari' was =detection of crime'. Detection of crime never means prior information of crime. On receiving specific information the police party would have departed for raiding and not for detection. 28. Two spare number plates bearing No. DL- 4 CR-7283 were also found in Indigo car. The said number was found to be actual registration number of apprehended car whereas, that car was being driven by appellant using a registration number of another vehicle. Said fact was proved by placing on record screening reports and NET details Ex. PW-14/F and Ex. PW 14/H. Non association of any witness with regard to visit of Investigation Officer to Delhi on the address given at the time of registration of Indio Car did not effect genesis of prosecution case. 29. Objection with regard to non deposit of driving licence in Malkhana was explained by Investigating Officer by stating that driving licence was in the case file. 30. Counsel for Appellant also pointed out discrepancies in taking photographs by PW-7 HC Kalyan Singh. Photographs and videography is a piece of evidence to corroborate prosecution story. 29. Objection with regard to non deposit of driving licence in Malkhana was explained by Investigating Officer by stating that driving licence was in the case file. 30. Counsel for Appellant also pointed out discrepancies in taking photographs by PW-7 HC Kalyan Singh. Photographs and videography is a piece of evidence to corroborate prosecution story. Photographs proved on record definitely suggest that appellant, police party and independent witnesses PW-1 Yaseen Ali and Mustak were present on the spot. Failure to take photograph from particular angle might have been insignificant in case there were material contradictions and discrepancies in ocular version of witnesses. Prosecution case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of ocular as well as documentary evidence. Therefore any lapse on the part of PW-7 in taking photographs from particular angle did not have effect on prosecution case. Even ignoring all photographs, there is sufficient material on record to prove the guilt of appellant. 31. No other point was urged. In view of above discussion, we are of considered view that prosecution has been able to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt by leading clear, cogent, convincing and reliable evidence. Thus, in our considered view, findings returned by the trial Court are based on correct and complete appreciation of material on record, warranting no interference. 32. It is a fit case for invoking provisions of Section 60 of NDPS Act to conveyance used for transporting narcotic substance. Therefore, trial court is also directed to initiate proceedings under Section 60 (3) of the NDPS Act for confiscation of apprehended Indigo car in accordance with law. 33. In view of the above discussion, appeal filed by appellant is dismissed being devoid of any merit and findings returned by trial court are affirmed and conviction and sentence is maintained. 34. Record of the case also be returned forthwith.