JUDGMENT : Rajiv Sharma, J. Since both the appeals arise out of the common judgment, the same are taken up together for disposal in order to avoid repetition of evidence. Cr. Appeal No. 385 of 2010. 2. The State has come in appeal against the judgment and order dated 12.5.2010 & 1.6.2010, respectively, rendered by the learned Special Judge, Chamba, H.P. in Sessions Trial No. 3 of 2010, 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 convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 50,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount, he was ordered to further undergo imprisonment for one year. Cr. Appeal No. 457 of 2010. 3. The appellant-accused has challenged the judgment and order dated 12.5.2010 and 1.6.2010, respectively, rendered by the learned Special Judge, Chamba, H.P. in Sessions trial No. 3 of 2010. 4. The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that when the police personnel were present at place known as Salooni, falling in Chamba district, accused was noticed by them carrying a bag at 6:40 AM. On seeing the police party, the accused tried to run away. He was apprehended. The search of the bag of the accused was conducted. Charas was recovered. It weighed 3 kgs. Search, seizure and sealing proceedings were conducted at the spot. The accused was arrested and the case property was sent to FSL for chemical analysis. On completion of the investigation, challan was put up before the Court after completing all the codal formalities. 5. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as ten witnesses. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He has denied the prosecution case and pleaded innocence. The learned trial Court convicted the accused on the basis of FSL report Ext. PX, for possessing 740 grams of charas as the total resin in the recovered charas was found to be about 740 grams, which was less than commercial quantity but more than small quantity, as noticed hereinabove. 6. Mr. M.A. Khan, learned Addl. The learned trial Court convicted the accused on the basis of FSL report Ext. PX, for possessing 740 grams of charas as the total resin in the recovered charas was found to be about 740 grams, which was less than commercial quantity but more than small quantity, as noticed hereinabove. 6. Mr. M.A. Khan, learned Addl. Advocate General, for the State has vehemently argued that as per the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of State of H.P. vrs. Mehboon Khan and analogous matters, reported in Latest HLJ 2014 (HP) (FB) 900, there was 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. In other words, submission is that the accused should have been convicted for being in conscious possession of 3 kg. of charas instead of reducing it to 740 grams on the basis of FSL report Ext. PX. On the other hand, Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the accused has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 7. We have heard learned counsel for both the sides and gone through the judgment and records of the case minutely. 8. PW-1 Const. Rajesh Kumar testified that on 10.11.2009, he along with HC Kartar Singh, HC Varinder Singh, Const. Aslam Mohd., HHC Kewal Krishan reached near Salooni at about 6:30 PM. They proceeded towards Kishan side on patrolling. When they reached near saw-mill (flour mill), Kuldeep Kumar came from flour mill side and HC Kartar Singh started talking with him. In the meantime, one person came from downward side and accused on seeing the police party tried to turn back. HC Kartar Singh nabbed the accused with the help of other police officials. The accused disclosed his identity. His consent was also obtained for search of his bag. He was carrying a bag in his hands of “Shakti Bhog Atta”. The bag was searched. It contained charas in the shape of sticks. It weighed 3 kgs. The recovered charas was put in the same bag and then put in the cloth parcel and sealed with five seals of seal “K”. The specimen of the seal was separately taken vide Ext. The bag was searched. It contained charas in the shape of sticks. It weighed 3 kgs. The recovered charas was put in the same bag and then put in the cloth parcel and sealed with five seals of seal “K”. The specimen of the seal was separately taken vide Ext. PW-1/D and seal after use was handed over to witness Kuldeep. NCB form was prepared in triplicate and seal was also affixed over the same. The charas was taken into possession vide memo Ext. PW-1/E. In his cross-examination, he denied the suggestion that forest colony was situated near the place of occurrence. He was not aware that village Siul was situated near the spot, though he had admitted that the owner of the sawmill was not made witness. The saw mill was closed at that time. 9. PW-2 HHC Kewal Krishan also deposed the manner in which the accused was apprehended at 6:40 PM, search, seizure and sealing proceedings were completed at the spot. The option was given to the accused by the I.O. vide memo Ext. PW-1/A. The accused opted to be searched by the police vide memo Ext. PW-1/B. The charas was recovered. All the codal formalities were completed at the spot. The I.O. prepared rukka and sent to the Police Station through him. In his cross-examination, he deposed that the spot was at a distance of 12-13 km. from the Police Station, Kihar. It took about one hour time to complete the proceedings till the rukka was handed over to him by the I.O. The entire proceedings were completed in the light at the saw-mill. 10. PW-3 HC Rakesh Kumar testified that on 15.11.2009, he was on leave and on his return from leave, the case property of this case was handed over to him as per entry in register No. 19. On 17.11.2009, one sealed parcel stated to be containing 3 kgs charas sealed with five seals of seal “K” and resealed with three seals of seal “H” along with seal impressions “K” and “H” were sent to FSL, Junga through HHC Subhash Kumar vide RC No. 84/09. 11. PW-4 ASI Hans Raj is the I.O. He deposed that on 11.11.2009, MHC Rakesh Kumar was on leave. 11. PW-4 ASI Hans Raj is the I.O. He deposed that on 11.11.2009, MHC Rakesh Kumar was on leave. On that day, ASI/SHO Hans Raj deposited with him one sealed parcel duly sealed with 5 seals of “K” and three seals of impression “H” stated to be containing 3 kgs charas, specimen seal impressions “K” and “H”, NCB form in triplicate which were entered by him in the malkhana register vide Ext. PW-3/A. On the next day, he handed over the charge to MHC Rakesh Kumar. 12. PW-5 Const. Satish Kumar deposed that on 11.11.2009 HC Virender Singh produced the case property before SHO Hans Raj. He resealed the parcel with seal “H” by affixing three seals over it. 13. PW-7 ASI/SHO Hans Raj deposed that on 11.11.2009 at about 12:15 PM, HC Virender Singh produced before him case property. He resealed the parcel with seal “H”. The relevant columns of NCB form were filled in by him. He deposited the case property with the MHC. 14. PW-8 HC Virender Singh also deposed the manner in which the accused was apprehended, search, seizure and sealing proceedings were completed on the spot. 15. PW-10 HC Kartar Singh also deposed the manner in which the accused was apprehended, search, seizure and sealing proceedings were completed on the spot. The accused was apprised of his right to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. The accused consented to be searched before him. He and other police officials gave personal search to the accused. Rukka Ext. PW-10/A was prepared. It was sent to the Police Station, Kihar through HHC Kewal Krishan. The case property and papers were handed over to HC Virender Singh. He also retained specimen seal impression Ext. PW-1/D. In his cross-examination, he denied that he knew Kuldeep Singh personally. He was talking with him and was asking his name etc. He talked with him for about 5-6 minutes. He remained on the spot for about 1 ½-2 hours. None came to the spot except police officials. He did not notice any forest quarters at the spot. 16. The prosecution has duly proved that the accused was found in possession of 3 kg. of charas. All the codal formalities were completed on the spot, including the sealing proceedings. NCB form in triplicate was prepared. Rukka was sent to the Police Station, on the basis of which FIR was registered. 16. The prosecution has duly proved that the accused was found in possession of 3 kg. of charas. All the codal formalities were completed on the spot, including the sealing proceedings. NCB form in triplicate was prepared. Rukka was sent to the Police Station, on the basis of which FIR was registered. The case property was produced before the ASI/SHO Hans Raj. He resealed the same with seal impression “H” by affixing seals at three points. The case property was deposited with the MHC of the Police Station. He entered the same in the malkhana register. It was sent to the FSL, Junga. 17. According to the report of the FSL, Junga, Ext. PX, the resin was found to be 24.66% w/w. The accused was convicted for possessing 740 grams of charas on the basis of resin extract by the learned Special Judge, Chamba. This view of the learned Special Judge, Chamba is in contravention with the law laid down by this Court in the case of State of H.P. vrs. Mehboon Khan and analogous matters, reported in Latest HLJ 2014 (HP) (FB) 900. The Full Bench of this Court has categorically held, as noticed hereinabove, 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…………..” 18. Thus, as per the ratio laid down in the judgment referred to above by the Full Bench of this Court, the accused was in possession of 3 kg. of charas and is liable to be convicted accordingly. 19. Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate, learned defence counsel has vehemently argued that the independent witness Kuldeep Singh was not examined by the prosecution. However, the fact of the matter is that the statements of PW-1 Const. Rajesh Kumar, PW-2 HHC Kewal Krishan, PW-8 HC Virender Singh and PW-10 HC Kartar Singh inspire confidence. There is no contradiction in the statements, the manner in which the accused was apprehended, search, seizure and sealing proceedings were completed on the spot. Moreover, PW-10 HC Kartar Singh has deposed that he did not know Kuldeep Singh personally. He talked to him only for 5-6 minutes. 20. Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate, learned defence counsel has also argued that the persons from the saw-mill should have been examined by the prosecution as witnesses; however, it has come on record as per the statement of PW-1 Const. Rajesh Kumar that the sawmill was closed at that time since the incident has happened at 6:30 PM on 10.11.2009. 21. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No. 385 of 2010 filed by the State is allowed. The judgment and order of the learned Special Judge, Chamba, H.P in Sessions Trial No. 3 of 2010 dated 12.5.2010 and 1.6.2010, respectively are set aside. The accused is convicted for being in conscious and exclusive possession of 3 kgs. of charas. Criminal Appeal No. 457 of 2010, preferred by the accused is dismissed. The accused be heard on the quantum of sentence. Production warrant be issued accordingly for 12.5.2016.