JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J.(Oral) The instant appeal stands directed against the impugned judgment of conviction besides qua sentences in sequel thereof as stood pronounced upon the accused/convict for his committing an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 15.6.2007 at about 4.30 p.m H.C. Subhash Chand was present in his office and received a secret information that accused deals in Ganja in huts near Kushat Ashram, Una and on that day he was seen there in search of customers. Thereafter, after completing codal formalities he formed a raiding party consisting of constables Anil Kumar, Surinder Singh, Gurdial Singh and Rajesh Kumar and proceeded towards Kushat Ashram. Near Kushat Ashram, Una he joined Surinder Kumar and Sukhdev Singh as independent witnesses. At about 6.10 p.m when they were present there, the accused came from the side of railway track with the bundle hanging on his right shoulder. He was intercepted by the police and informed that he was suspected to be possessing Ganja and his search was to be conducted. The accused was informed of his right to be searched before the Gazetted Officer or the Magistrate but the accused stated that he wanted to give his search to the police party present at the spot. So the search of the accused was conducted by the police. Before this search the police officials present at the spot gave their search to the accused regarding which memo Ext.PW-1/B was prepared and nothing incriminating was recovered. Thereafter the search of the accused as well as bundle in his possession was conducted and a polythene envelope was recovered from the bundle. The polythene envelope was containing Ganja which on weighing was found to be 3 K.gs. Thereafter two samples of 250 grams each were separated from it and the samples as well as bulk were sealed with seal having impression of English alphabet 'S' and the seal after use was handed over to PW Surindr Kumar. Thereafter, the accused was arrested and grounds of his arrest were communicated to the accused and information of his arrest was given to his wife. Thereafter, the accused along with case property was produced before the SHO, who resealed the case property with seal bearing impression of English alphabet "D" and deposited the same with the MHC. Thereafter, the accused was arrested and grounds of his arrest were communicated to the accused and information of his arrest was given to his wife. Thereafter, the accused along with case property was produced before the SHO, who resealed the case property with seal bearing impression of English alphabet "D" and deposited the same with the MHC. After completing all codal formalities and on conclusion of the investigation into the offence, allegedly committed by the accused challan was prepared and filed in the Court. 3. A charge stood put to the accused by the learned trial Court for his committing offences punishable under Sections 20 of the NDPS Act to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses. On closure of prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, was recorded in which he pleaded innocence and claimed false implication. He did not choose to lead any evidence in defence. 5. The accused stands aggrieved by the findings of conviction recorded upon him by the learned trial Court for his committing an offence punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act. The learned counsel appearing for the accused has concerted to vigorously contend qua the findings of conviction recorded by the learned trial Court standing not based on a proper appreciation of evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation of material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of conviction warranting reversal by this Court, in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs being replaced by findings of acquittal. 6. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State has with considerable force and vigour, contended qua the findings of conviction recorded by the Court below standing based on a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record and theirs not necessitating any interference rather meriting vindication. 7. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has, with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record. 8. Ganja holding a weight of 3 K.G. stood recovered under recovery memo Ext. PW-1/C from a 'Gathari', Gathari whereof stood, at the apposite time, slung on the shoulder of the accused/convict. 7. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has, with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record. 8. Ganja holding a weight of 3 K.G. stood recovered under recovery memo Ext. PW-1/C from a 'Gathari', Gathari whereof stood, at the apposite time, slung on the shoulder of the accused/convict. The aforesaid manner of effectuation of recovery of Ganja renders un-attractable besides uncompliable the statutory mandate engrafted in Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. PW-9 and PW-10 appended their signatures thereon as witnesses thereto. A reading of recovery memo held in Ext.PW-1/C underscores the trite factum qua the Investigating Officer concerned separating from the bulk of 3 K.G. of ganja, two samples, holding a weight of 250 grams each, for their onward dispatch to the FSL, for facilitating the latter to record an opinion qua theirs holding the ingredients/constituents of Ganja. The apposite NCB form comprised in Ext.PW-4/B unveils, qua the Investigating Officer concerned embossing on two sample parcels separated from the bulk of Ganja, three seal impressions of English alphabet 'S'. The aforesaid memos makes a disclosure qua the SHO concerned reembossing, on parcels holding a weight of 250 gram each, seal impressions of English alphabet 'D'. A perusal of recovery memo comprised in Ext.PW-1/C, marks the factum qua the Investigating Officer, at the relevant site of occurrence in the presence of witnesses detailed therein subsequent to his effectuating from the conscious and exclusive possession of the convict recovery of bulk of Ganja holding a weight of 3 K.G., his therefrom separating two samples of 250 grams each, samples whereof stood enclosed in two cloth parcels whereon he embossed three seal impressions of alphabet 'S', where after he enclosed in a cloth parcel the remaining bulk of 'Ganja' holding a weight of 2.50 Kg., whereon he embossed three seal impressions of English alphabet 'S'. 9. 9. The apt connectivity inter se the recovery of Ganja holding a weight of 3 KGs from the alleged conscious and exclusive possession of the accused under memo Ext.PW-1/C vis-a-vis the production of the relevant case property before the learned trial Court, is visibly emanable for the reasons alluded hereinafter:- (a) Imminently, the prosecution stood enjoined by adducing cogent evidence to secure a firm conclusion qua the trite factum qua the apposite reflections held in the report of the FSL comprised in Ext.PW-4/F rendered on Ext.P-3 holding a weight of 250 grams whereon the Investigating Officer as disclosed in the NCB form proceeded to at the site of occurrence emboss three seal impressions of alphabet 'S' where after the SHO concerned re-embossed thereon two seal impressions of alphabet 'D' there within holding upsurgings bespeaking qua synonymity qua the relevant recovery effectuated under memo Ext.PW-1/C. The apt connectivity inter se the affirmative opinion recorded on the sample parcel borne on Ext.P-3 by the FSL concerned vis.a.vis the relevant factum probandum borne on Ext.PW-4/F would ensue from clinching evidence qua the seal impressions reflected in NCB form to stand borne on Ext.P-3 holding a weight of 250 gram holding congruity with the apposite reflections in respect thereto manifested in the report of the FSL concerned, embodied in Ext.PW-4/F. A perusal of the report of the FSL comprised in Ext.PW-4/F unveils qua the apposite congruity inter se the narrative therein qua the seal impression(s) embossed thereon vis.a.vis the apposite narrative qua the seal impression(s) reflected in Ext.PW-1/C to stand embossed thereon at the site of occurrence, manifestly surging forth, significantly with paragraph 7 thereof underscoring qua the singular sample parcel of Ganja held in Ext.P-3 sent to it for analyses standing sealed with three seals impressions holding English alphabet 'S' and also with two reembossed seal impression(s) of English alphabet 'D', factum whereof holds visible synonymity with reflection(s) occurring in Ext.PW-4/F. Also Ext.PW-4/F underscores qua sample parcel of Ganja held in Ext.P-3 standing delivered to the FSL concerned by an authorised official, who stands named therein to be one HHC Jeet Singh. The aforesaid authorised official who had carried the singular parcel of 'Ganja' to the FSL concerned, has stepped into the witness box as PW-6 wherein he has unveiled qua the relevant sample parcel standing handed over to him by HHC concerned for its standing carried by him for its onward transmission to the FSL concerned, besides he underscores therein qua his delivering it thereat on 18.06.2007 where after he echoes qua on his returning to the Police Station concerned, his handing over the apposite RC to the HHC. The counsel for the accused has contended with vigour qua the non adduction by the prosecution, of the apposite RC would constrain an inference qua the prosecution failing to rely upon the report of the FSL concerned also he contends qua the aforesaid factum denuding the effect of congruity emerging inter se the seal impression(s) embossed on the sample parcel by the I.O at the time contemporaneous to his effectuating recovery of Ganja under memo Ext.PW-1/C at the site of occurrence from the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused vis.a.vis the seal impressions reflected in Ext.P-4/F to stand borne thereon besides the effect of the relevant synchronity occurring inter se reembossed seal impressions thereon vis.a.vis the apposite reflection in Ext.PW-1/C also standing belittled. However, the aforesaid submission does not hold any tenacity imperatively when the reflections qua the embossing at the site of occurrence of sample seal impression(s) on sample parcel(s) drawn by the Investigating Officer from the bulk of Ganja, holds utmost congruity besides alignment with the apposite reflections occurring in the report of the FSL concerned, efficacy whereof stood unconcerted to stand eroded by the defence, comprised in its adducing cogent evidence personifying qua the sample parcel of Ganja held in Ext.P-3 whereon a report held in Ext.PW-4/F stood prepared, standing tampered with, efficacious concert whereof stood comprised in the relevant sample parcel Ext.P-3 whereon the apposite opinion comprised in Ext.PW-4/F stood purveyed by FSL concerned standing demonstrated to not hold the signatures of the accused and of the witnesses thereto. However, want of apposite efforts qua the facet aforesaid by the defence renders erectable an inference qua its espousal hereat being wholly unfounded besides surmisal. However, want of apposite efforts qua the facet aforesaid by the defence renders erectable an inference qua its espousal hereat being wholly unfounded besides surmisal. (b) Evidence qua connectivity emerging inter se the recovery of Ganja under memo Ext.PW-1/C from the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused by the Investigating Officer vis.a.vis the production of the incriminating seized contraband before the learned trial Court also stands enjoined to surge forth, evidence qua the aforesaid connectivity ensues from the factum of PW-1 in his examination in chief during course whereof the relevant case property stood shown to him, his underlining therein with unequivocality qua the bulk parcel holding analogity with the one which stood seized at the site of occurrence from the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused also he underscores therein qua it thereat holding synonymity with the apposite reflections occurring in recovery memo Ext.PW-1/C. He in his examination in chief during course whereof the sample parcel comprised in Ext.P-3 stood shown to him also testified qua it likewise holding analogity with the 'one' which stood prepared at the site of occurrence by the Investigating Officer concerned. Moreover, thereupon he tacitly underscores in his examination in chief qua sample parcel held in Ext.P-3 whereupon an affirmative opinion comprised in Ext.PW- 4/F stood recorded by the FSL concerned qua its contents holding the constituents of Ganja also holding similarity with the apposite descriptions in respect thereof occurring in Ext.PW-4/F and in Ext.PW-1/C, latter exhibit whereof stood prepared by the Investigating Officer concerned at the site of occurrence. The aforesaid communication made by PW-1 in his examination in chief where within he had made unfoldments qua the relevant seizures made at the site of occurrence by the Investigating Officer from the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused holding the apt connectivity with the case property which stood shown to him in Court remained during the course of his standing cross-examined by the learned defence counsel apparently unconcerted to be shred of tenacity. The apposite concerted efforts of the learned counsel to erode the effect of the aforesaid testification of PW-1 qua the relevant facet aforesaid stood comprised in his while holding PW-1 to cross-examination his putting apposite suggestions to PW-1, holding there within visible bespeaking qua both the bulk besides sample parcel in respect whereto PW-1 in his examination in chief on theirs standing shown to him at the stage contemporaneous to his deposition standing recorded before the learned trial Court made loud echoings qua theirs holding the apt connectivity with the relevant seizure made from the conscious and exclusive possession at the site of occurrence by the Investigating Officer qua hence the apt connectivity being amiss or theirs standing tampered with or the seal impressions borne thereon holding graphic inter se incongruity with the seal impressions manifested in NCB form Ext.PW-4/F. However, the aforesaid suggestion remaining unpurveyed to PW-1 by the learned defence counsel. Omission of the aforesaid assays by the learned counsel for the accused for his thereupon belittling the effect of the communications made by PW-1 in his examination in chief where within he unequivocally deposed qua the relevant connectivity emerging inter se the relevant case property shown to him in Court by the PP vis-a-vis reflections occurring in Ext.PW-1/C, Ext.PW-4/B and Ext.PW-4/F concerned, fillips an obvious conclusion qua the defence unavailing the apposite mode to erode the apposite unfoldments made by PW-1 in his examination in chief whereupon the apposite unfoldments made by PW-1 in his examination in chief wherein he testifies qua the relevant connectivity existing inter se the seized property vis-a-vis the property as shown to him in Court, hence acquires truth. (c) The learned counsel appearing for the accused has contended with vigour qua with PW-5 in his cross-examination acquiescing to the suggestion purveyed to him by the learned counsel for the accused qua his omitting to with specificity mention qua how many samples of seals stood deposited before him, hence giving an immense leeway qua the accused qua PW-6 who had carried the sample parcel Ext.P-3 to the FSL for the latter analysing it for facilitating it to thereupon record an opinion thereon, whereon an apposite affirmative opinion stood recorded by it, hence not holding the apposite connectivity inter se Ext.PW-4/F, vis-à-vis Ext.P-3 whereat it stood produced in Court. However, the aforesaid submission is legally frail conspicuously when the effect of the aforesaid acquiescence does not as contended by the learned counsel for the accused either convey qua PW-5 after the FSL concerned recording its apposite opinion on Ext.PW-4/F, the FSL not transmitting it to the Police Station concerned nor it conveys qua his not receiving it besides it also does not convey qua his not storing Ext.P-3 in the apposite Malkhana. The aforesaid inference would ensue only upon the learned counsel for the accused while holding PW-5 to cross examination his putting apposite suggestions to him for thereupon hence his concerting to elicit communications from him qua Register No. 19 not holding any apposite reflections in portrayal, of PW-5 after receiving Ext.P-3 from the FSL concerned in sequel to the latter recording an affirmative opinion qua the contents held there within, his thereupon yet omitting to reflect the apposite fact therein. However, the aforesaid apposite effort for securing the aforesaid apposite elicitation from PW-5 remained unassayed by the learned counsel for the accused whereupon it is befitting, to, in coagulation with the omission of the learned defence counsel to belittle the apt testimony of PW-1 held in his examination in chief wherein he has echoed qua the case property as stood shown to him in Court, it, thereat holding synonymity with the relevant seizure(s), hence conclude qua the defence acquiescing qua the factum qua the relevant incriminating 'seizure' holding an apt alignment qua "it" at the apposite stage of 'its' production in Court. The learned counsel for the accused has contended with vigour qua the absence of production in Court the apposite Malkhana Register with portrayals therein qua PW-5 Incharge of the Malkana concerned, at the stage contemporaneous to the transmission of the case property to the P.P. concerned for its standing shown to PW-1, his retrieving it from the Malkhana concerned also incontemporanity thereof his making apposite reflections in the apposite register, rendering hence the apposite connectivity qua the factum probandum inter se the aforesaid exhibits to hence stand denuded or thereupon a conclusion standing earned qua the apposite connectivity inter se the apt seizure made under Ext.PW-1/C vis-a-vis its purported production in Court whereat it stood shown to PW-1 not standing convincingly established. However, it is not an unfailing obligation cast upon the prosecution to always for securing an unflinching qua an imminent connectivity emerging inter se the relevant 'seizure' vis.a.vis its production in Court, to compulsorily produce in Court abstract of Malkhana with portrayals qua its standing retrieved from the Malkhana concerned by its Incharge also in contemporanity thereof his making apposite entries in the apposite register. Contrarily hereat with the case property standing produced in Court in a sealed condition also when it stands concluded qua at the time of its production in Court, it, holding synonymity with seal impressions occurring thereon and as stand reflected in Ext.PW-1/C and Ext.PW-4/F, factum whereof also stands inevitably unearthed from the learned defence counsel while holding PW-1 to cross-examination his omitting to put apposite suggestions to him for hence eroding the tenacity of the aforesaid deduction nor his making concerted efforts to evince from him qua the relevant parcel holding the samples of Ganja also the parcel holding the bulk of ganja both not holding the signatures of the accused nor any anlaogity inter se the seal impression borne thereon vis-a-vis the seal impression in respect thereto reflected in Ext.PW-1/C and Ext.PW-4/F emerging therefrom, concomitantly thereupon with the defence failing to rebut the efficacy of the testimony rendered qua the relevant facet by PW-1 in his examination-in-chief also with the defence while holding PW-5 to cross-examination not concerting to make an allusion to the apposite Malkhana register, for thereupon its making unveilings from PW-5 qua his neither retrieving the case property from the Malkana concerned for its onward dispatch by him to the PP concerned nor his incontemporanity thereof making apposite reflections in the Register concerned, failure whereof of the defence counsel renders nugatory the omission of the PP concerned to place on record, the abstract of the Malkhana register holding there within the aforesaid apposite portrayals. Moreover, during the course of recording of the deposition of PW-1, the relevant exhibits holding there within the apposite seized contraband, stood exhibited by the learned trial Court, exhibition whereof occurred in the presence of the learned defence counsel, yet the latter despite holding the opportunity thereat to visualize the exhibits shown to PW-1 by the P.P. concerned also to visualize other exhibits wherefrom the herein above apt inference qua the imperative intra se connectivity occurring intra se each hence stands drawn, for his thereupon deciphering each exhibit(s) for unearthing therefrom intra se contradictions for hence enfeebling the aforesaid inference whereas his rather palpably omitting to protest thereat qua their exhibition, contrarily manifests his acquiescence qua thereat intra se congruity qua the factum probandum standing unflinchingly underscored whereupon the defence holds no leverage to hereat espouse qua no apt intra se connectivity ensuing or occurring inter se relevant reflections held in each exhibits predominantly when thereat the learned defence counsel held the opportune moment to elicit the espoused unearthings, moment whereof standing not seized by him whereupon reiteratedly his espousal hereat stands frustrated. 10. The official witnesses to the relevant exhibits also qua the genesis of the prosecution case in their respective examinations in chief unfolded articulations bereft of any taint of any inter se contradictions occurring inter se their respective examinations in chief vis-a-vis their respective cross-examinations besides their respective depositions unveil qua theirs rendering an account qua genesis of the prosecution case with intra se harmony whereupon it would be sagacious to place implicit reliance upon their respective testimonies, dehors the fact qua theirs being officials of the police department 11. Nowat, the effect of independent witnesses PW-9 and PW-10 to recovery memo Ext.PW-1/C reneging from their previous statements recorded in writing, is to stand construed along with the factum of theirs respectively in their respective cross-examinations to which they stood subjected to by the learned PP on theirs standing declared hostile, admitting the factum of theirs signatures occurring thereon. Nowat, the effect of independent witnesses PW-9 and PW-10 to recovery memo Ext.PW-1/C reneging from their previous statements recorded in writing, is to stand construed along with the factum of theirs respectively in their respective cross-examinations to which they stood subjected to by the learned PP on theirs standing declared hostile, admitting the factum of theirs signatures occurring thereon. Consequently, when they admit the occurrence of their signatures on the relevant memos thereupon the mandate of Section 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act whereupon they on admitting the occurrence of their signatures thereon hence stood statutorily estopped to renege from the recitals borne thereon, thereupon the effect of theirs orally deposing in variance or in detraction to the recitals which occur therein gets statutorily belittled rather when they naturally emphatically hence statutorily prove the recitals comprised in the apposite memos, their orally reneging from the recitals borne thereon holds no evidentiary clout nor it is legally apt to outweigh the creditworthiness of the testimonies of the official witnesses qua the recovery of Ganja under recovery memo Ext.PW-1/C standing effectuated from the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused, contrarily the uncontroverted factum qua their signatures occurring in the relevant exhibits, concomitantly renders the apposite recitals borne thereon to hold grave probative worth. The ensuing sequel thereof is qua with the statutory estoppel constituted in Section 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, barring PW-9 and PW-10 to orally resile from the contents of Ext.PW-1/C Ext.PW- 11/B and Ext.PW-11/C especially when they admit the signatures occurring thereon to belong to them renders unworthwhile besides insignificant the factum qua theirs orally deposing in variance of its recorded recitals, thereupon per se an inference stands enhanced qua dehors their reneging from their previous statements recorded in writing, a deduction standing capitalized qua thereupon theirs proving the genesis of the prosecution case. 12. For the reasons which have been recorded herein above, this Court holds that the learned Special Judge, Fast Track Court, Una, has appraised the entire evidence on record in a wholesome and harmonious manner apart therefrom the analysis of the material on record by the learned Judge does not suffer from any perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation and non appreciation of evidence on record, rather it has aptly appreciated the material available on record. 13. 13. In view of the above, I find no merit in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. In sequel, the impugned judgment and sentence is affirmed and maintained. Record of the learned trial Court be sent back forthwith. Committal warrants be prepared accordingly.