JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. 1. Appellant, Nurdh (hereinafter referred to as the accused) has been convicted by learned Special Judge Chamba, Sessions Division Chamba for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as “NDPS Act” in short) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- vide judgment dated 11.5.2017 passed in Sessions Trial No. 18 of 2012. 2. Now, if coming to the factual matrix, a police party headed by HC Deva Nand (PW-9) and comprising HC Shoukat Ali (PW-1), Constable Sandip Kumar and SPO Sanjeev Kumar (PW-3) had left police station during the night intervening 15-16.12.2011 for patrolling towards Lesuin, Kuddi, Bhanota and Bharada side. It is around 5.00 a.m. early in the morning on 16.12.2011, the police party when reached at Nagni jungle, noticed the accused coming from Chajot side. On seeing the police party, he tried to return back. He was asked to stop but of no avail, therefore, HC Deva Nand had apprehended him with the help of accompanying police officials. On inquiry, the accused disclosed his antecedents. Since the police had suspicion on his carrying some narcotic substance with him, therefore, his consent was obtained vide memo Ext. PW-1/B. On being consented for his search by the police officials itself, PW-9 had given his own search. Memo Ext. PW-1/A was recorded in this regard. During his personal search, he was found carrying white coloured packet which he had concealed inside the sweater and the shirt worn by him. The same was found to be tucked near his stomach. On checking the bag (Ext. P-2), charas Ext. P-3 was found kept inside. The same was in the shape of sticks (batties) and when weighed was found to be 950 grams. The recovered charas was put back in the same packet and sealed with five impressions of seal ‘H’. The same was taken into possession vide memo Ext. PW-1/D. The sample of seal ‘H’ was taken on a piece of cloth, which is Ext. PW-1/C. The I.O. PW-9 HC Deva Nand thereafter prepared the rukka Ext. PW-9/A and it was sent to police station through PW-1 HC Shokat Ali for registration of FIR. Consequently, FIR Ext. PW-7/B came to be registered at Police Station, Tissa. PW-1/D. The sample of seal ‘H’ was taken on a piece of cloth, which is Ext. PW-1/C. The I.O. PW-9 HC Deva Nand thereafter prepared the rukka Ext. PW-9/A and it was sent to police station through PW-1 HC Shokat Ali for registration of FIR. Consequently, FIR Ext. PW-7/B came to be registered at Police Station, Tissa. The Investigating Officer had completed the codal formalities such as prepration of recording entries in the NCB forms in triplicate Ext. PW-9/A, spot map Ext. PW-9/C and thereafter apprised the accused about the grounds of arrest vide memo Ext. PW-9/D. He was then arrested on the same day. PW- 9 HC Deva Nand had brought the accused and the case property to the police station and produced the same along with the sample of seal and seizure memo before the Inspector/SHO Jagdish Chand (PW7), who had re-sealed the parcel containing the charas with seal ‘A’. The re-seal memo is Ext. PW-4/A. The impression of seal ‘A’ was also affixed on the NCB forms. He had retained the facsimile of seal on a piece of cloth which is Ext. PW- 4/B. PW-7 had thereafter deposited the case property with MHC Avinder Singh (PW4), who in turn sent the same to Forensic Science Laboratory, Junga vide RC No. 148/2011. As per report of FSL, Ext. P-A, the contraband found in possession of the accused being extract of cannabis was sample of charas. 3. On completion of investigation, the report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed against the accused in the trial Court. Learned trial Court in view of the report and the documents annexed therewith and finding a prima-facie case having been made out against the accused had proceeded to frame charge under Section 20 of the NDPS Act against the accused. He, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge. Therefore, the prosecution has examined nine witnesses in all to substantiate the charge so framed against him. 4. The statement of accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was also recorded. The accused had also examined Sh. Daulat Ram (DW-1) in his defence. 5. On completion of the record, learned trial Judge has heard the parties on both sides and recorded the findings of acquittal on the sole ground that in view of the judgment in Sunil Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2010 (1) Sim. The accused had also examined Sh. Daulat Ram (DW-1) in his defence. 5. On completion of the record, learned trial Judge has heard the parties on both sides and recorded the findings of acquittal on the sole ground that in view of the judgment in Sunil Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2010 (1) Sim. L.C. 192, the contraband allegedly recovered from him is charas alone has not been proved. 6. It is thus seen that initially the accused was acquitted of the charge under Section 20 of the NDPS Act by learned Special Judge vide judgment dated 10.12.2012 on the sole ground that in terms of the law laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in a case titled Sunil Kumar’s case (supra) the contraband allegedly recovered from him on the basis of report of Chemical Examiner Ext. PA was not proved to be charas. In an appeal, Cr. Appeal No. 136 of 2013 preferred by the State against the findings of acquittal so recorded by learned trial Court, the same was allowed and the judgment passed by learned Special Judge quashed and set aside as well as the case remanded to learned trial Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law in view of the law laid down by a larger Bench of this Court in State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Mehboob Khan 2013 (3) Him. L.R. (FB) 1834, vide judgment dated 27.10.2016. 7. Consequent upon the remand of the case, learned Special Judge, Chamba has decided the case afresh and vide judgment under challenge in this appeal has convicted and sentenced the accused in the manner as pointed out at the very outset. 8. The legality and validity of the impugned judgment has been questioned on the grounds inter-alia that the findings as recorded are based on hypothetical reasoning, surmises and conjectures. The evidence available on record has been appreciated in a slipshod and perfunctory manner. The evidence, no doubt, has not only been appreciated in its right perspective but at the same time, unrealistic standards have been set to evaluate the cogent and reliable evidence produced in his defence by the accused. The material contradictions in the statements of prosecution witnesses have not been taken into consideration and to the contrary, the findings of conviction recorded irrespective of the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt. The material contradictions in the statements of prosecution witnesses have not been taken into consideration and to the contrary, the findings of conviction recorded irrespective of the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt. The evidence that the parcel containing the case property when produced in the Court, the seals were not found intact has also not been considered in its right perspective. No plausible explanation in this regard is forthcoming. The prosecution has miserably failed to associate independent person to witness the search and seizure. The non- compliance of mandatory provisions enshrined under the NDPS Act have also not been taken into consideration. 9. Mr. R.S. Chandel, Advocate, learned counsel representing the appellant-accused has argued that the provisions contained under Section 50 of the NDPS Act have not been complied with and as a result thereof, the entire proceedings and also the trial has vitiated. It was also pointed out during the course of arguments that the contraband allegedly recovered from the accused was in the shape of sticks, however, it has come in the prosecution evidence that the parcel when opened the same was found in the shape of round or broken pieces. The weight of the contraband allegedly charas at the time of its seizure was 950 grams, however, when weighed in the laboratory, it was found to be 936 grams. Such variation in weight according to learned counsel remained unexplained. The occurrence was not witnessed by any independent person, hence on the basis of the testimony of official witnesses, no findings of conviction could have been recorded as according to him, as per the topography, the site at which the accused was nabbed and the search and seizure having taken place is a snow bound area. It has also been pointed out that although the site of occurrence is Nagni Jungle, but as per the version of PW-2, they did not stop there. 10. On the other hand, learned Addl. Advocate General has repelled the contentions so raised on behalf of the appellant-accused and argued that most reliable and tangible evidence having come on record by way of testimony of PW-1 Shoukat Ali and PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar supported by that of the I.O. PW-9 HC Deva Nand, it is proved beyond all reasonable doubt that charas weighing 950 grams was recovered from the physical and conscious possession of the accused. The prosecution evidence is neither contradictory nor inconsistent and rather unequivocally supports the prosecution case on all material aspects. The spot being an isolated place is fully proved from the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and other evidence available on record. Learned Addl. Advocate General has also pointed out that no grounds qua compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act, recovered charas was not found in that very shape in which it was recovered and that the ground qua variation in weight has not been raised in the memorandum of appeal and introduced for the first time during the course of arguments. No suggestion was put to the witnesses while in the witness box that the place of recovery was a snow bound area. The impugned judgment, as such, has been sought to be upheld. 11. Now, if coming to the question of non-compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act raised on behalf of accused, in our considered opinion, the same in all fairness as well as in the ends of justice, should be answered in negative for the reason that the present is not a case where the police had prior information of someone coming with charas in his possession in that area when they were patrolling. Anyhow, in the case in hand, the option was given to the accused vide memo Ext. PW-1/B. The same is in tune with Section 50 of the NDPS Act. The accused though has not made any endorsement in his hand, being an illiterate person and it is the I.O. PW-9 HC Deva Nand who himself has recorded that the accused opted for his search by the police itself. Anyhow, as already observed, the present is not a case where the compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act was involved, therefore, the contentions to the contrary raised by learned defence counsel are hardly of any help to the accused. 12. The rapat Rojnamcha Ext. PW-3/A reveals that the police party headed by PW-9 HC Deva Nand had left the police station at 11:15 PM for patrolling in the area towards Lasuin, Kuddi, Behnota and Bharada etc. On 16.12.2011 at 5:00 AM in the early morning, the accused was seen in Nagni forest coming from the side of Village Chajot. On seeing the police party, he became nervous and tried to flee away. On 16.12.2011 at 5:00 AM in the early morning, the accused was seen in Nagni forest coming from the side of Village Chajot. On seeing the police party, he became nervous and tried to flee away. He, however, was overpowered there and then by the police party. On enquiry, he disclosed his name and other antecedents to the I.O. PW-9 HC Deva Nand. It was an isolated place and odd hours so it was not possible to associate any person to witness search and seizure. He, therefore, associated PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali and PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar as witnesses. PW-9 HC Deva Nand and the witnesses had given their search first to the accused vide memo Ext. PW-1/A. Nothing incriminating except I.O. kit was recovered from them. It is thereafter on apprising the accused of his legal right to be searched before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer, his search was conducted. He agreed to give search to the police officials present at the spot. A white coloured carry bag was found to be concealed by him in the sweater and shirt he had worn at that time which was tucked near his stomach. On checking, the carry bag, black coloured substance in the shape of sticks was recovered therefrom. According to the prosecution case, on the basis of its smell and experience, the police party found it to be charas (Ext. P-3). The same was weighed with the help of weighing machine in the I.O. kit and found to be 950 grams. After weighing the recovered charas, it was put in the same carry bag (Ext. P-2) and thereafter sealed in parcel of cloth (Ext. P-1) with 5 impressions of seal “H”. Sample of seal Ext. PW- 1/C was drawn separately. The I.O. had filled in the relevant columns of NCB-I form in triplicate on the spot. The seal after its use was handed over to PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali. 13. After sealing and sampling process, rukka Ext. PW- 9/A was prepared and it was handed over to PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali for being taken to Police Station Tissa for registration of FIR against the accused. On the basis of rukka, FIR Ext. PW-7/B was recorded by PW-4 HC Avinder Singh, the then M.H.C. Police Station Tissa. After registration of FIR, PW-7 Insp. PW- 9/A was prepared and it was handed over to PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali for being taken to Police Station Tissa for registration of FIR against the accused. On the basis of rukka, FIR Ext. PW-7/B was recorded by PW-4 HC Avinder Singh, the then M.H.C. Police Station Tissa. After registration of FIR, PW-7 Insp. Jagdish Chand has prepared the case file and it was handed over to PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali for being taken to I.O. on the spot. The said witness had subsequently handed over the case file to HC Deva Nand, the I.O. 14. The prosecution case as discussed hereinabove, stands satisfactorily proved from the testimony of PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali, PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar and the I.O. PW-9 HC Deva Nand. If their testimony in cross-examination is seen, it would not be improper to conclude that their version in examination-inchief remained un-shattered for the reason that they all in one voice tells us that they left the Police Post Nakrod on foot. They have also given the distance in between Police Post Nakrod and Village Kuddi, from village Kuddi to village Lesuin, village Lesuin to village Bhanota and village Bhanota to village Chajot and while giving such distance there is not much dissimilarities in their respective statements. They are also categoric that they did not stop anywhere on the way to the spot. The suggestion that the police patrol had proceeded from Bhanota to Nagni jungle and that no habitation is there between two places has been admitted as correct. Being so, the accused himself admits that in between Bhanota and Nagni jungle, there was no habitation and as such, the prosecution case that the place of recovery was an isolated place hence it was not possible to join the independent witnesses stand proved even from the defence of the accused also. Though PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar tells us that Village Chajot is situated adjoining Nagni Jungle and that 14-15 houses are situated in that village, even if it is believed to be so, no one could have come forward to assist the police being odd hours. They all are categoric that they reached at Nagni jungle around 5:00 am and the accused was spotted by them way back from Nagni jungle after patrolling. They have also stated in one voice that the accused was coming from village Chijjot side. They all are categoric that they reached at Nagni jungle around 5:00 am and the accused was spotted by them way back from Nagni jungle after patrolling. They have also stated in one voice that the accused was coming from village Chijjot side. It was an open clearance in the jungle where the accused was apprehended. They have also stated in one voice that NCB form was filled in on the spot. PW-1 though admitted that the people have grazing rights in Nagni jungle, however, expressed their ignorance that in the early morning people come there for grazing the cattle and cutting the fuel wood. He has admitted that no independent witness was associated, however, further stated voluntarily that recoveries are generally being effected during night and as such it is not possible to join independent witnesses. 15. True it is that PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar while in the witness box has stated that the patrolling did not stop in Nagni jungle and also that the accused was apprehended in that very jungle. As a matter of fact, the police party after patrolling in the jungle was on its way when the accused spotted and nabbed, meaning thereby that the police party stopped in the jungle when the accused was apprehended and search was conducted. It is stated so by PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar in the next line of his cross-examination that after the accused was apprehended they remained in the jungle for about 2 hours and 45 minutes. Therefore, it lie ill in the mouth of the defence to claim that the police party did not stop at Nagni jungle. PW-9 HC Deva Nand has clarified in his examination-in-chief that when the accused was nabbed, they had come back to Chajot village after patrolling in Nagni jungle. 16. All the incriminating circumstances were put to the accused in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. His answerer is denial simplicitor, without any explanation as to why such circumstances were not correct. Although, the prosecution has to stand on its own legs and no support can be drawn from the statement of the accused recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. yet some explanation must come from the accused also as to why the incriminating circumstances appeared against him in the prosecution evidence. Although, the prosecution has to stand on its own legs and no support can be drawn from the statement of the accused recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. yet some explanation must come from the accused also as to why the incriminating circumstances appeared against him in the prosecution evidence. His only explanation is that he is innocent and the witnesses have deposed falsely against him which cannot be believed as gospel truth to hold him innocent. 17. The plea the accused raised in his defence that he was made to alight from the bus at zero point Jasurgarh while travelling from Bhajradu to Chamba in a bus is not only an after thought but concocted also as DW-1 Daulat Ram, he examined in his defence, has not stated as to whether they were travelling in private or HRTC bus. He even has not produced any bus ticket also. Above all, in the absence of there being any enmity of the police with the accused, charas in huge quantity i.e. 950 grams cannot be said to be planted on him. The best available opportunity to the accused was to have lodged the repot with learned Magistrate that he has been implicated falsely before whom he was produced within 24 hours of his arrest. He, however, has not lodged any such complaint. On the other hand, learned trial Judge has considered and examined this part of the matter in its right perspective with the help of case law. For the sake of convenience, para 33 of the judgment under challenge is reproduced here as under: “33. Daulat Ram (DW-2) was examined by the accused to show his false implication in the case by the police. It was stated by this defence witness that on 15.12.2011, he along with the accused was travelling in the last bus Enroute from Bhanjraru to Chamba. They had boarded the bus at Chilli and when they had reached at Zeero point Jasourgarh, the police had got the accused disembarked from the bus and had detained him. However, I find that his testimony is of no help to the accused for the reason that he is a co-villager of the accused. Then, Daulat Ram had not produced any bus ticket so as to show that he indeed had been travelling along with the accused in the last bus Enroute from Bhanjraru to Chamba on 15.12.2011. However, I find that his testimony is of no help to the accused for the reason that he is a co-villager of the accused. Then, Daulat Ram had not produced any bus ticket so as to show that he indeed had been travelling along with the accused in the last bus Enroute from Bhanjraru to Chamba on 15.12.2011. Further, there is nothing on record to show that the accused had protested when he was wrongly arrested. The accused had been produced before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba on 17.12.2011. He had not complained before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba about his false implication. Therefore, the plea of the accused regarding false implication cannot be accepted. In Som Nath vs. State Cr. Appeal No. 341/07 decided on 13.11.2009, a plea was taken that police officials were chasing some Sadhus and accused was falsely implicated. The defence witness was also examined to establish this plea. It was laid down by the Hon’ble High ourt that in the absence of any complaint at the earliest point of time such plea is not acceptable. Similarly, it was held in Andre Moll vs. State of H.P. 2010 (3) Shim. L.C. 131 that when the accused was produced before the Magistrate for his remand within 24 hours of arrest and no complaint was made by him regarding false implication, such plea cannot be accepted. Therefore, in view of these binding precedents of the Hon’ble High Court, the plea regarding false implication is an afterthought and cannot be accepted.” 18. True it is that no conviction can be recorded on the sole testimony of a police officer. However, if the evidence having come on record by his testimony is otherwise reliable and trustworthy, the same is legally admissible and can be relied upon to record the findings of conviction against the accused. It is worth mentioning that presumption that a person acts honestly applies as much in favour of a police officer viz-a-viz other persons and it is not proper to distrust and suspect him without there being good grounds therefor. It is worth mentioning that presumption that a person acts honestly applies as much in favour of a police officer viz-a-viz other persons and it is not proper to distrust and suspect him without there being good grounds therefor. Learned trial Judge has considered this aspect of the matter in its right perspective while placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Govindaraju alias Govinda vs. State by Sriampuram Police Station and Another, (2012) 4 SCC 722 , Tika Ram vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2007) 15 SCC 760, Girja Prasad vs. State of M.P. (2007) 7 SCC 625 , Aher Khima vs. State of Saurshtra AIR 1956 SC 217 , Baldev Singh vs. State of Haryana, 2016 Cri. L.J. 154, Kashmir Singh vs. State of Punjab 1999 Cri. L.J. 2876, Jarnail Singh vs. State of Punjab, JT 2011 (2) SC 120, Takashi Sato vs. State of H.P. 2010 (3) Shim. L.C. 449, Ajmer Singh vs. State of Haryana, (2010) 3 SCC 746 , State of H.P. vs. Vinod Kumar, 2002 (3) Shim. L.C. 137, Tahir vs. State (Delhi), (1996) 3 SCC 338 and Makhan Singh vs. State of Haryana, JT 2015 (4) SC 222, which have been considered by this Court also in Criminal Appeal No. 305 of 2014 titled Sohan Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh decided on 2.11.2016. 19. Similar is the view of the matter taken by this Court in a recent judgment rendered in Cr. Appeal No. 374 of 2017 titled Het Ram vs. State of Himachal Pradesh decided on 26.3.2018. 20. Although difference in weight of the charas at the time when it was recovered and subsequently when weighed in the laboratory has not been raised as one of the grounds in the appeal, however, during the course of arguments, this omission has been brought to the notice of this Court by learned defence counsel. The submissions made in this regard are again without any substance for the reason that this aspect of the matter has also been dealt with appropriately by learned trial Court not only with the help of the given facts and circumstances but also the law applicable in such a situation. The submissions made in this regard are again without any substance for the reason that this aspect of the matter has also been dealt with appropriately by learned trial Court not only with the help of the given facts and circumstances but also the law applicable in such a situation. The scale of the I.O. kit cannot certainly be said to be so accurate to weigh the material like the recovered charas, whereas in the laboratory latest weighing machine/equipment is used to weigh a particular substance sent there for analysis, therefore, the weight of the contraband i.e. charas in the laboratory can reasonably be believed to be accurate as compared to the weight thereof with the scale in the I.O. kit. Otherwise also, the difference in weight of the recovered charas is only 14 grams which is not of such a nature so as to render the prosecution story qua its recovery from the accused improbable. Such variation in weight may also occur as in the interregnum i.e. the day when it was recovered and the day when weighed in the laboratory got dried. Support in this regard can be taken from the judgment of the Apex Court in Dehal Singh vs. State of H.P. AIR 2010 SC 3594 . Learned trial Court has taken into consideration this judgment while deciding this part of the controversy. 21. Therefore, the difference of 14 grams of charas when weighed in the laboratory is also not fatal to the prosecution case. 22. The so called variation in the shape of the recovered charas observed at the time of its recovery and when the sealed parcel opened in the Court has also been heavily pressed into service to belie the prosecution case. The entire prosecution evidence comprising oral as well as documentary is suggestive of that the recovered charas was in the shape of sticks/batties. It is stated so by PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali, PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar and the I.O. HC Deva Nand (PW-9). However, when the sealed parcel containing the charas opened in the Court, the charas in the shape of broken rounds and small pieces was found sealed therein. This omission in the prosecution evidence has been pressed into service to persuade this Court to form an opinion that the case property was tampered with. However, when the sealed parcel containing the charas opened in the Court, the charas in the shape of broken rounds and small pieces was found sealed therein. This omission in the prosecution evidence has been pressed into service to persuade this Court to form an opinion that the case property was tampered with. Had it been so, the suggestions to this effect would have been given to PW-1 HC Shaukat Ali and PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar during their cross-examination that the case property has been tampered with. However, no suggestion in this behalf was given to them. The prosecution witnesses, as such, had no occasion to clarify this aspect of the matter while in the witness-box. Even to the I.O. PW-9 HC Deva Nand also only it is suggested that in the statement of PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali it was recorded that the recovered charas was in the shape of batties (sticks). No suggestion to I.O. has also been given that the recovered charas was tampered with or that the same when taken out from the sealed parcel in the Court was not in that very shape in which it was recovered. The mere observation while recording the statement of PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali that the charas when taken out from the sealed parcel on its opening in the Court was in the shape of broken rounds and small pieces is not sufficient to form an opinion that the charas sealed in the parcel opened in the Court was not the same which was recovered from the accused during search and seizure. On the other hand, the possibility of the charas which was in the shape of sticks may have got broken into small pieces while in transit to the Forensic Science Laboratory cannot be ruled out. Anyhow, when there is no cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses in this regard nor it is one of the grounds of challenge to the impugned judgment, such plea seems to be raised by learned defence counsel merely for rejection. 23. It has also been pointed out during the course of arguments that seals were found to be broken when the parcel was produced in the Court. The ground so urged is again without any substance for the reason that all the seals were not found to be broken and rather it is one seal of impression ‘A’ was found partially damaged. The ground so urged is again without any substance for the reason that all the seals were not found to be broken and rather it is one seal of impression ‘A’ was found partially damaged. Even the seals which were found to be damaged, its impressions were found visible on the parcel. The remaining seals of Forensic Science Laboratory and impression ‘H’ as well as ‘A’ were also found intact. Therefore, the breakage of few of the seals on the parcel also does not render the prosecution case doubtful nor is sufficient to persuade this Court to take a view of the matter contrary to the one taken by learned trial Court. 24. Now, coming to the link evidence, Ext. PW-9/A is the rukka scribed by PW-9 HC Deva Nand after completion of the search and seizure proceedings on the spot. It is well established that the same was taken to Police Station Tissa by PW-1 HC Shoukat Ali on the basis whereof FIR Ext. PW-7/B was registered against the accused. The entry in daily diary Ext. PW- 1/D substantiates the prosecution case qua the police party having reached at the Police Station at 4:15 PM on 16.12.2011. The I.O. PW-9 HC Deva Nand handed over the sealed parcel to PW-7 SHO Jagdish Chand, Police Station Tissa. PW-7 SHO Jagdish Chand has resealed the parcel with 5 impressions of seal ‘A’. The specimen of seal ‘A’ Ext. PW-4/B was also obtained on a piece of cloth. He also filled relevant entries in the NCB form in triplicate and affixed impression of seal ’A’ thereon. He prepared the memo Ext. PW-4/A to prove that the parcel was resealed by him with seal ‘A’. The parcel thereafter was handed over to PW- 4 HC Avinder Singh for safe custody in the malkhana. Rapat Ext. PW-4/G to this effect was also entered in the daily diary. The entries were made by PW-4 HC Avinder Singh qua receipt of the case property in the malkhana register, the extract whereof is Ext. PW-4/C. The copy of rukka Ext. PW-6/A and special report Ext. PW-6/B were sent to the office of Superintendent of Police Chamba through PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar. The same were received by PW-6 HC Subhash Chand on 16.12.2011, the Reader to S.P. Chamba. He has entered both the documents at Sr. No. 14457/BD in the receipt register. PW-5 Const. PW-4/C. The copy of rukka Ext. PW-6/A and special report Ext. PW-6/B were sent to the office of Superintendent of Police Chamba through PW-2 SPO Sanjeev Kumar. The same were received by PW-6 HC Subhash Chand on 16.12.2011, the Reader to S.P. Chamba. He has entered both the documents at Sr. No. 14457/BD in the receipt register. PW-5 Const. Rajesh Kumar has taken the case property to FSL Junga along with the docket vide RC No. 148 of 2011 Ext. PW-4/D on 17.12.2011. He deposited the said articles at Forensic Science Laboratory on 19.12.2011 and produced the receipt before MHC on his return to the Police Station. The report Ext. PA reveals that the exhibit sent for analysis was containing extract of cannabis, hence, the sample of charas. Therefore, the link evidence produced by the prosecution also connects the accused with the commission of the offence. 25. Therefore, the overwhelming oral as well as documentary evidence, cogent and reliable, lead to the only conclusion that charas was recovered from the exclusive and conscious possession of accused Nurdh. He has, therefore, rightly been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay rupees twenty thousand as fine. Being so, the impugned judgment neither can be said to be based upon hypothesis, conjectures and surmises nor suffer from any illegality or irregularity on account of placing reliance on the testimony of the official witnesses. On the other hand, the prosecution has proved its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. 26. For all the reasons hereinabove, this appeal fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. The impugned judgment is affirmed.