JUDGMENT : Rajiv Sharma, J. State has come in appeal against Judgment dated 31.12.2007 rendered by the learned Special Judge, Fast Track, Kullu, HP in Sessions Trial No. 13/07, whereby respondent-accused (hereinafter referred to as 'accused' for convenience sake), who was charged with and tried for offence punishable under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act' for convenience sake), has been acquitted. 2. Case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that, on 12.5.2006, at 3.00 PM, ASI Shiv Singh alongwith HHC Amar Singh, Constable Jinesh Kumar, Constable Dina Nath, Chhape Ram Patwari, Dhian Singh Forest Guard and NCB officials was present at Salech in connection with destruction of illicit cultivation of poppy plants. It was found that poppy plants had been grown in two fields located at Village Salech. Chappe Ram Patwari told that the fields denoted by Khasra No. 1947 measuring 1-13-0 Bigha belonged to the accused. Copies of Jamabandi and Tatima of said fields were handed over to ASI Shiv Singh by Chhape Ram Patwari. Constable Dina Nath was directed by ASI Shiv Singh to locate independent witnesses from nearby place. Dina Nath returned after a lapse of half an hour and stated that nobody was found in the Village. Thereafter ASI Shiv Singh associated Chhape Ram Patwari and Dhian Singh Forest Guard as witnesses in the case. Twenty poppy plants were cut from the fields and were taken into possession. Two samples of poppy plants five number each were separated from the cut plants and were sealed in separate parcels. Remaining poppy plants were sealed in separate parcel. Three impressions of seal T’ were affixed on each parcel. NCB form in triplicate was prepared on the spot. Seal, after use, was handed over to witness Dhian Singh. Samples of seal impression were obtained separately. A seizure memo was also prepared on the spot which was signed by the witnesses. Rukka was prepared on the spot by ASI Shiv Singh and sent to Police Station, Kullu, through Constable Dina Nath for registration of FIR. ASI Shiv Singh handed over the case property to SHO Sarwan Kumar. SHO Sarwan Kumar resealed the case property and handed over the same to MHC Rup Singh at Police Station, Kullu. A special report was prepared by ASI Shiv Singh which was handed over to Dy.SP Kullu. ASI Shiv Singh handed over the case property to SHO Sarwan Kumar. SHO Sarwan Kumar resealed the case property and handed over the same to MHC Rup Singh at Police Station, Kullu. A special report was prepared by ASI Shiv Singh which was handed over to Dy.SP Kullu. On 14.5.2006, sample of poppy plant, samples of seal impressions ‘H’ and ‘T’ and other connected documents were sent to CTL Kandaghat through Constable Pratap Singh by MHC Rup Singh. Case property was deposited with CTL Kandaghat. Investigation was completed and Challan was put up in the Court after completing all codal formalities. 3. Prosecution has examined as many as eleven witnesses to prove its case against the accused. Accused was also examined under Section 313 CrPC. He denied the case of the prosecution. Trial Court acquitted the accused. Hence, this appeal by the State. 4. Mr. M.A. Khan, Additional Advocate General, has vehemently argued that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused. 5. Ms. Kanta Thakur, Legal Aid Counsel, has supported Judgment dated 31.12.2007. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the record carefully. 7. Dhian Singh Forest Guard (PW-1) testified that on 12.5.2006, police party had come to Village Salech from Police Post Bhunter in order to destroy cannabis and poppy plants. Police party was also accompanied by NCB officials. Police party had found cultivation of poppy plants in one field at Village Salech. It was stated by Chhape Ram Patwari that the field belonged to Atma Ram (accused). He did not remember the Khasra number of the field. The area under cultivation of poppy plants was about one Bigha. Patwari Chhape Ram prepared Tatima of the field and handed over the same to the police. Poppy plants were removed and destroyed from said field. 20 poppy plants were taken into possession by the police and memo Ext. PA was prepared in this connection. Poppy plants were sealed in two parcels. In his cross-examination, this witness admitted that the police met him on the date of occurrence at Village Salech. He did not remember how many police personnel were present on the spot. He was present with Patwari near Village Salech when police met him. They reached Salech at about 12 Noon or 1 PM. He also admitted that there were 10/15 houses in the Village Salech. He did not remember how many police personnel were present on the spot. He was present with Patwari near Village Salech when police met him. They reached Salech at about 12 Noon or 1 PM. He also admitted that there were 10/15 houses in the Village Salech. Distance between Village Salech and Village Dhara was about 2 ½ km. He also admitted that accused Atma Ram resided in Village Dhara. He also admitted that the independent witnesses were not called on the spot from the Village by the police. Chhape Ram Patwari had not conducted demarcation in his presence in order to identify the fields. Accused was not on the spot. 8. Chhape Ram, Patwari (PW-2) deposed that poppy plants were found on Khasra No. 1947 measuring 1-13-0 Bigha. Atma Ram was the owner of that Khasra number. He was also in possession of this Khasra number. The land was identified with the application of Jareb. He did not remember whether any person was called to the spot from the Village by the police. Some poppy plants from the field were cut and removed and were sealed in parcels. One bulk parcel was prepared and two sample parcels were also prepared. All the parcels had also been sealed on the spot. He did not remember to whom seal after use was handed over. He handed over copy of Jamabandi and Tatima to the police. In his cross-examination, this witness has deposed that he had not conducted demarcation on the spot. He also admitted that the revenue officials of the rank of Kanungo and above were competent to conduct demarcation. He denied that he had not conducted Girdavari on the spot. He admitted that he had not supplied record pertaining to Khasra Girdavari of the Khasra number to the police. He had mentioned in Girdavari about the cultivation of poppy plants on the Khasra number. He denied the suggestion that Atma Ram (accused) was not present on the spot though Dhian Singh (PW-1) has deposed that the accused (Atma Ram) was not on the spot. 9. MHC Rup Singh (PW-4) deposed that on 12.5.2006, SHO Sarwan Kumar deposited in the Malkhana, three sealed parcels containing poppy plants. Each parcel was having three seal impressions of ‘H’ and three seal impressions of ‘T’. 9. MHC Rup Singh (PW-4) deposed that on 12.5.2006, SHO Sarwan Kumar deposited in the Malkhana, three sealed parcels containing poppy plants. Each parcel was having three seal impressions of ‘H’ and three seal impressions of ‘T’. He also deposited with him samples of seal impressions ‘H’ and ‘T’, NCB form in triplicate and other connected documents. These articles were deposited at 11.50 PM. Necessary entry was made by him in the Malkhana Register at Sr. No. 208. On 14.5.2006, sample of poppy plants, samples of seals ‘H’ and ‘T’ and other connected documents were sent to CTL Kandaghat through Constable Pratap Singh vide RC No. 124/06. 10. SI Ram Karan (PW-7) deposed that on 8.5.2006 Shri P.K. Sharma, Intelligence Officer, NCB came to the Police Station, Banjar. He disclosed to him that he had visited various places in Banjar region and had found that there was illegal cultivation of poppy. The information was reduced into writing under Section 42 (2) of the Act. 11. Inspector/SHO Sarwan Kumar (PW-8) deposed that at 11.30 PM, three sealed parcels were produced before him by ASI Shiv Singh. Each parcel was having three seal impression of seal ‘H’. He resealed the same by affixing three seal impression of seal ‘T’ on each parcel. At 11.50 PM, case property was handed over to MHC Rup Singh. Sample of seal impressions ‘T’; was also taken by him separately and one sample impression of seal ‘T’ was Ext. PT. 12. HHC Dina Nath (PW-9) deposed that at about 3 PM, they reached near Village Salech. It was found that poppy plants had been cultivated in two fields. Poppy plants were bearing flowers. ASI Shiv Singh asked Chhape Ram Patwari about the ownership of fields in which poppy plants had been grown. Chhape Ram Patwari told ASI Shiv Singh that the fields denoted by Khasra No. 1947 measuring 1-13-0 Bigha were owned and possessed by accused Atma Ram. ASI Shiv Singh directed him to locate independent witnesses from nearby place. He went to Village Salech. Nobody was found in the Village. Houses of Villagers were found locked. ASI Shiv Singh thereafter associated Chhape Ram Patwari and Dhian Singh Forest Guard as witnesses in the case. 20 Poppy plants were removed from the fields. Two samples were separated from aforesaid 20 plants. He went to Village Salech. Nobody was found in the Village. Houses of Villagers were found locked. ASI Shiv Singh thereafter associated Chhape Ram Patwari and Dhian Singh Forest Guard as witnesses in the case. 20 Poppy plants were removed from the fields. Two samples were separated from aforesaid 20 plants. In his cross-examination, this witness admitted that, between Village Salech and bridge located on Sainj road, there were a number of Villages. Chhape Ram and Dhian Singh had also met them near Larji. 13. ASI Shiv Singh (PW-11) testified that Patwari Chhape Ram inspected the revenue record and disclosed that the fields belonged to accused Atma Ram. Khasra number of these fields was 1947 measuring 1-13-0 Bigha. He obtained record from Chhape Ram Patwari. He directed Constable Dina Nath to locate independent witnesses from nearby Village. After half an hour, Constable Dina Nath returned back and stated that no independent witness was present in the Village and houses were found locked. He associated Chhape Ram and Dhian Singh as witnesses in the case. 20 poppy plants were removed from the fields. Two samples of five plants each were separated and sealed in separate parcels. In his cross-examination, he admitted that the accused Atma Ram was the resident of Village Dhara. Patwari Chhape Ram had conducted demarcation of the aforesaid fields in his presence on the spot. Field Kanungo was not present on the spot at the time of demarcation. Government forest was situate adjacent to Village Salech. He had not obtained copy of Khasra Girdavari from the Patwari. Poppy plants were cut from the fields. ASI Shiv Singh testified that he sent Dina Nath (PW-9) to find out independent witnesses. Dina Nath came back. He deposed that no independent witness was present in the Village. Houses were found locked. Dina Nath (PW-9) deposed that ASI Shiv Singh directed him to locate independent witnesses from nearby place. He went to Village Salech. Nobody was found in the Village. Houses of Villagers were found locked. Dhian Singh (PW-1), in his cross-examination admitted that there were 10/15 houses in the Village Salech. Distance between Village Salech and Village Dhara was about 2 ½ km. It is not believable that all the houses in the Village were locked and thus no independent witness could be located. Police ought to have associated independent witnesses in the proceedings. Dhian Singh (PW-1), in his cross-examination admitted that there were 10/15 houses in the Village Salech. Distance between Village Salech and Village Dhara was about 2 ½ km. It is not believable that all the houses in the Village were locked and thus no independent witness could be located. Police ought to have associated independent witnesses in the proceedings. Association of independent witnesses lends credence to the proceedings. 14. ASI Shiv Singh (PW-11) testified in his cross-examination that Patwari Chhape Ram had conducted demarcation of the fields in his presence to ascertain that the fields belonged to accused Atma Ram. However, Chhape Ram Patwari (PW-2) in his cross-examination deposed that he has not conducted demarcation of the spot. Revenue officials of the rank of Kanungo or above were competent to conduct the demarcation. Chhape Ram Patwari (PW-2) deposed that he had prepared Khasra Girdavari and has shown the cultivation of poppy plants in the field of accused. However, fact of the matter is that he has not handed over copy of Khasra Girdavari to the police. Chhape Ram Patwari (PW-2) deposed that Atma Ram (accused) was present on the spot. Though, Dhian Singh (PW-1) admitted that Atma Ram was not on the spot. Dina Nath (PW-9) deposed that the accused Atma Ram was not present at the spot. Shiv Singh (PW-11) has also deposed that he has not obtained copy of Khasra Girdavari from the Patwari. Field Kanungo was not present at the time of conducting demarcation, though Government forest land was also situate adjacent to the Village Salech. He also admitted that accused Atma Ram was resident of Village Dhara. 15. We have also noticed that there are discrepancies in the statements of witnesses about the presence of accused on the spot at the time of conducting proceedings. Dhian Singh (PW-1) has deposed that the accused was a resident of Village Dhara. However, ASI Shiv Singh (PW-11) also testified that that the accused Atma Ram belonged to Village Dhara. Volunteered that he also resided at Village Salech. ASI Shiv Singh (PW-11) has also admitted that the brothers and uncles of accused Atma Ram resided at Village Salech. According to Chhape Ram (PW-2) also, Atma Ram was present on the spot. In case Atma Ram was present on the spot, his signatures ought to have been obtained on the seizure memo. 16. ASI Shiv Singh (PW-11) has also admitted that the brothers and uncles of accused Atma Ram resided at Village Salech. According to Chhape Ram (PW-2) also, Atma Ram was present on the spot. In case Atma Ram was present on the spot, his signatures ought to have been obtained on the seizure memo. 16. Though, it has come in the statement of Dina Nath (PW-9) and ASI Shiv Singh (PW-11) that efforts were made to find out independent witnesses but Dhian Singh (PW-1), in his cross-examination, categorically deposed that the independent witnesses were not called on the spot from the Village by the police. Thus, police has not led any tangible evidence to prove that the fields in question were demarcated in accordance with law in order to identify its owner. IO should have taken into possession copy of Khasra Girdavari from Chhape Ram Patwari (PW-2). 17. Thus, there is no occasion for us to interfere with the well reasoned judgment of the learned trial Court. 18. Accordingly, in view of the discussions and analysis made hereinabove, the present appeal has not merits. The same is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications if any are disposed of. Bail bonds of the accused are discharged.