Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1374 (HP)

Parshotam v. State of H. P.

2019-09-12

SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2019
JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. The instant appeal, stands directed, by the appellant, against the judgment of conviction pronounced, on 23.7.2008, by the learned Special Judge Chamba Division, Chamba, H.P, in, Session Trial No. 13 of 2008, wherethrough, findings, of conviction, were returned upon the appellant, for his committing offences punishable, under Section 20, of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act,1985, (i) and, also therethrough, the, accused/appellant, stood sentenced, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 years, and, to pay, a, fine of Rs. 25,000/-, for, the commission, of, an offence, punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, and, in default of payment of fine, he stood further sentenced, to, undergo simple imprisonment, for, six months. 2. The facts relevant to the case, are, that on 1.2.2008 at about 5.30 PM at Chanju bridge, the police party headed by ASI Ashok Kumar was present in connection with patrolling duty. The police had put a picketing there at Chanju bridge. At that time, one person came there from Kuparigala side who was having a blue coloured bag on his left shoulder. On seeing the police party, the said person at once got frightened and tried to flee away. The said person was nabbed by ASI Ashok Kumar with the help of other police officials. His name and parantage was ascertained, who disclosed his name as Parshotam, son of Hari Singh. The bag which the accused was holding was checked in which pant, T-shirt and a polythene envelope of light gree colour were recovered. The polythene envelope on opening was found containing charas in the shape of sticks which on weighment found 1 kg 650 gms. Complying with the formalities, the I.O. separated two samples of 25 gms each. The bulk and the sample parcels were sealed with seal 'K'. Thereafter, the other codal formalities were also completed and the accused was arrested. After completion of the investigation and after receipt of the FSL report, the charge-sheet was filed against the accused for having committed the offence under section 20 of the Act. 3. The accused was charged for committing an offence punishable under Section 20 of the ND & PS Act. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses. After completion of the investigation and after receipt of the FSL report, the charge-sheet was filed against the accused for having committed the offence under section 20 of the Act. 3. The accused was charged for committing an offence punishable under Section 20 of the ND & PS Act. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses. On conclusion of recording of prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. stood recorded by the trial Court, wherein, he made disclosures qua his false implication. However, he did not lead any defence evidence. 4. On an appraisal of evidence on record, the learned trial Court, recorded findings of conviction against the accused/appellant herein. 5. The accused/appellant, is, aggrieved by the judgment of conviction recorded, by the learned trial Court. The learned Counsel appearing, for the accused/ appellant has concertedly, and, vigorously hence contended qua the findings of conviction, recorded by the learned trial Court, standing not, based on a proper appreciation, by it, of the evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation, by it, of the material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of conviction, being reversed, 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 Additional Advocate General, has, with compatible force, and, vigor, also contended that the findings of conviction, as, recorded by the learned Court below, rather standing based, on a mature, and, balanced appreciation, "by it", of evidence on record, and, theirs not necessitating, an, interference, rather theirs 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. The recovery of the relevant item, of contraband, was made, from the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused, through memo, borne in Ext. 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. The recovery of the relevant item, of contraband, was made, from the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused, through memo, borne in Ext. PW10/A, (i) whereon, the uncontested signatures of accused, stand borne, and, hence the estopping statutory principles, engrafted in the provisions of Section 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, bar the accused to contest the voicing(s), borne therein, unless, the hereinafter alluded apt interconnectivities, do not emerge, at the stage of production of the case property in Court, (a) AND in contemporaneity, vis-a-vis, the afore seizure, standing effectuated, by the Investigating Officer concerned, from, the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused, rather NCB form, borne in Ext. PA, stood also drawn, (b) wherein reflections are cast, vis-a-vis, 6 seal impressions each, on the bulk, and, the sample parcels, hence carrying English alphabet "A", rather standing embossed thereon, and, thereon(s) also the uncontested signatures of the accused, stand borne, and, hence the estopping statutory principles, engrafted in the provisions of Section 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, bar the accused to contest the voicing(s), borne therein, unless the hereinafter alluded apt interconnectivities, do not emerge, at the stage of production of the case property in Court c) the Station House Officer concerned, upon receiving the seized contraband, at the police station concerned, also embossed thereon six re-sealing(s) seal impressions rather carrying English alphabet "K" and "A'. The afore seizures was/were, deposited, through Ext. PW6/A, in the Mallkhana concerned. Subsequent thereto, under road certificate, borne in Ext. PW10/C, the seized contraband, stood dispatched, to the FSL concerned, for, the latter hence making an opinion thereon. All the afore exhibits, carry narratives therein, vis-a-vis, the description, and, numbers, of the seal impressions, embossed, respectively upon the bulk, and, upon the sample parcels, and, all the afore visibly carry interse compatibilities, and, synonymity(ies). Furthermore, the FSL concerned, upon receiving, the case property, has, in its report, embodied, in Ext. All the afore exhibits, carry narratives therein, vis-a-vis, the description, and, numbers, of the seal impressions, embossed, respectively upon the bulk, and, upon the sample parcels, and, all the afore visibly carry interse compatibilities, and, synonymity(ies). Furthermore, the FSL concerned, upon receiving, the case property, has, in its report, embodied, in Ext. PW9/A, made echoing(s) therein rather bearing compatibility, vis-a-vis, the afore facets, as stand narrated, in the afore-referred exhibits, (d) and has also rendered, an opinion, qua the parcel, as, sent to it, for analysis, carrying therein rather all the ingredients, of, Charas, (e) and thereafter, echoing(s) are also borne therein, qua the FSL concerned, after extracting, the ingredients/contents, as stood carried, in the sample parcel, as stood, sent to it, for analysis, and, thereafter upon its making an opinion thereon, rather, it subsequent thereto, re-inserting the ingredients, in, the cloth parcel, and, it embossing thereon, the, seal impression(s), of, the FSL. The charge would be concluded to be efficaciously hence proven by the prosecution, (f) upon each of the prosecution witnesses concerned, where to whom, the case properties, stood shown in Court, hence in their respective testifications, making clear/candid echoing(s), qua the relevant congruities, and, similarities, interse, the numbers, and, descriptions of the seal impressions, as stand echoed, in the afore exhibits, also existing, upon, the case property, rather upon, its production in Court. However, at the time of production, of the case property in Court, and, thereat its being shown, to the prosecution witnesses concerned, though, as aforestated, the relevant connectivity’s, stand echoed, by the prosecution witnesses concerned, (g) and when thereat, the accused persons stood also represented, by the defence counsel, (h) hence when the learned defence counsel, rather thereat held the opportune moment, to, on sighting the case property, hence make therethrough(s) decipherments, and, discerning(s), vis-a-vis, the afore congruities, or compatibilities, being amiss therein (i) or not, rather, visibly even at the afore stage, the learned defence counsel, did not, either object to the production, or exhibition, of the case property in Court, (j) nor thereafter proceeded to make any strivings, to elicit, from the prosecution witnesses concerned, any echoing(s), qua the relevant connectivities, (k) not existing(s), nor the learned defence counsel endeavored, to, hence ensure qua the Court hence making any observation, during, the course of recording, of the testifications, of the prosecution witnesses', concerned, qua the aforestated relevant compatibilities, and, interconnectivities, interse the bulk, and, seal parcels, and, appertaining to the numbers, and, descriptions, of, six seal impressions, carrying English alphabet, "K", narrated in Ext.PW10/A , (i) rather not emerging, at the stage of production, of the case property in Court. In sequel to the afore, an inference is sparked, qua the learned defence counsel, rather acquiescing qua the relevant apposite congruities, and, connectivity’s, emerging inter-se, the, numbers and descriptions, of the seal impressions, carrying therein English alphabet "A", and, as stood embossed, on the samples, and, bulk parcels, and, qua wherewith, a synonymous narrative, is, carried in Ext. PW-1, hence at the imperative stage, of, "production of case property" in Court. 9. In summa, the emergence of clinching and potent evidence, vis-a-vis, the afore apt connectivity’s, hence surfacing, thereupon the effect, if any, of any minimal discrepancies, improvements or embellishments, vis-a-vis their previous statements recorded in writing or any minimal interse or any intrase contradiction, if any, occurring in the depositions, of the prosecution witnesses concerned, naturally, and, logically all get subsumed, and, subsided. 10. Nowat, the effect of an independent witness, to recovery memo Ext. 10. Nowat, the effect of an independent witness, to recovery memo Ext. PW10/A, rather reneging from his previously recorded statement in writing, is, to stand construed alongwith the factum, of his, in his cross-examinations, to which he stood subjected, to, by the learned Public Prosecutor "upon" his standing declared hostile, hence admitting the factum, of, his authentic signatures occurring thereon. Conspicuously, when, upon, his admitting the occurrence, of, his signatures, on the relevant memos, (a) thereupon the mandate of Sections 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, whereupon, he "on" admitting, the occurrence of his authentic signatures thereon, hence stood statutorily estopped, to hence, renege from the recitals, borne thereon, (b) stands rather attracted (c) whereupon the effect of his orally deposing, in variance or in detraction vis-a-vis, the recitals hence occurring therein, gets statutorily belittled (d) rather when he naturally and emphatically hence statutorily, proves the recitals, comprised in the apposite memos, thereupon his orally reneging from the recitals borne thereon "holds no evidentiary clout" (e) nor it holds any legal weight, to hence countervail the creditworthiness, of the testimonies of the official witnesses, qua the recovery of contraband, made under recovery memo Ext. PW10/A, hence standing effectuated therethrough, from the conscious, and, exclusive possession, of, the accused. Contrarily the uncontroverted factum, of, his authentic signatures, occurring in the relevant exhibits, concomitantly renders the apposite recitals, borne therein, rather, to hold a grave probative worth. The ensuing sequel thereof, is that with the principle, of, statutory estoppel, hence constituted in Sections 91 and 92, of the Indian Evidence Act, rather barring an independent witness, to orally resile, from the contents of Ext. PW10/A, (f) especially when he admits qua his apposite signatures occurring thereon, (g) thereupon renders unworthwhile besides insignificant, the factum, qua his orally deposing in variance vis-a-vis, its recorded recitals, (h) per se whereupon an inference stands enhanced qua dehors, his reneging from his previous statements recorded in writing, a deductions standing capitalized, qua thereupon, his proving the genesis, of the prosecution case, and, also strengthens, the reason assigned, by the learned Special Judge, for his thereupon, accepting the recitals occurring, in, Ext. PW10/A, 11. PW10/A, 11. Be that as it may, the vigour of the aforesaid conclusion, would stand benumbed, only upon hence evidence existing on record, with respect to the independent witnesses concerned, standing pressurized or coerced by the Investigating Officer concerned "to" emboss his/their authentic signatures, upon, seizure memo, borne in Ext.PW10/A. However, the independent witness concerned, though, in his testification, makes an attempt, to communicate qua his signatures, as, occur thereon standing obtained, despite, contents thereof being not read over, to him, and, upon his being pressurized, (a) yet the aforesaid communication "is bereft of any vigor" especially, when he, "does not", make any further unveilings in his testification, that, in the Investigating Officer concerned, purportedly omitting, to, read over to him, the contents of the aforesaid exhibits, "besides" hence, his obviously without purportedly understanding, their contents rather his appending his signatures thereon, (b) thereupon, upon, construing, the afore omissions, in entwinement, with his further omission, to record, a, complaint with the Officers superior, to the Investigating Officer concerned, rather (d) begets, an, inference, qua the effect, if, any, of the aforesaid communications, hence occurring in the testifications, of, the independent witness concerned, dehors, the afore be speakings not standing borne therein, rather not belittling, the, hereinabove drawn inference, anvilled upon, attraction "upon" the admitted factum, of, his authentic signatures, occurring, on Ext. PW10/A, , hence "the" mandate of Section 91 and 92, of, the Indian Evidence Act, (c) thereupon dehors his making the aforesaid, frail attempts, for, belying the recitals borne, in Ext. PW10/A, his rather hence statutorily proving all the recitals, as, occur therein. 12. Even though, the learned counsel appearing, for the appellant, has contended with much vigor, before this Court, that since PW-1, an independent witness, to the relevant proceedings, has, rendered, an, acquiescing, answer, to, a court query, qua his being pressurized, to, make his signatures, on the relevant memo, (i) thereupon his acquiescing, qua, the, occurrence, of, his uncontested signatures, on, the relevant memo, and, parcels hence rather not rendering, the vigor, of, the prosecution case rather being enhanced. However, the afore ground, is rudderless, as during, the course of his cross-examination, where to which, he stood subjected, to, by the learned Public Prosecutor concerned, upon, his being declared hostile, (ii) his making acquiescing therein, qua his signatures occurring, on, the relevant memo, and, on the relevant parcels, (iii) the effects whereof(s), when stand entwined with, vis-a-vis, PW-2, rather the defence, not endeavoring, to, mete any suggestion to him, qua the latters' signatures being also obtained, upon, pressure standing exerted, upon, him hence by the Investigating Officer, (iv) and, when therewith also stands coagulated, the, factum, vis-a-vis the Investigating Officer also remaining unmeted, any apt thereto suggestion, rather begetting a conclusion qua the afore dis-affirmative answers meted, by PW-2, to, the court query, qua, the Investigating Officer obtaining his signatures, upon, the relevant memo, and, parcels, upon, his exerting pressure upon him, rather being vulnerable, to, skepticism, (v) more so, when he has meted, a, dis-affirmative answer, vis-a-vis, a court query qua his making a complaint qua thereof, vis-a-vis, the superiors, of, the Investigating Officer. Furthermore, upon PW-3 being subjected, to cross-examination, and, his making a testification, vis-a-vis, the independent witness' arriving hence at spot, rather by chance, hence it appears, qua, the defence acquiescing, vis-a-vis, the, appending/ making, of, signatures, both by PW-1, and, by PW-2, on the relevant memo, and, on the parcels, being acquiesced, by both, to be hence made thereon, rather at the relevant site of occurrence, (vi) and, thereupon a conclusion is recorded qua the signatures, as are made thereon, being acquiesced by them, to be not made, on blank memos, (vii) and, also it appears qua an inference, of, acquiescing, being engendered, qua both making their signatures, upon, the relevant cloth parcels, emphatically upon, the latter(s) thereat enveloping there within, hence, the, recovered charas. The effect of the afore discussion is qua, when, independent witnesses, stood associated, by the Investigating Officer, in the relevant proceedings, and, when they rather turned hostile, vis-a-vis, the prosecution, (viii) thereupon they are not construable, to be interested in, the, success, of, the prosecution case, and, also qua theirs being not inimical nor holding any prejudice, vis-a-vis, the accused, also hence it appears, qua it, being not enjoined, upon, the Investigating Officer, to join, other independent witnesses, though, holding hence abodes, in, proximity, to, the relevant site of occurrence. 13. 13. For the reasons which have been recorded hereinabove, this Court holds that the learned trial Court 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 trial Court, does not, suffer from any gross perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation and non appreciation of evidence on record. Consequently, there is no merit in the instant appeal, hence, it is dismissed, and, the impugned verdict, is, affirmed, and, maintained. Records be sent back forthwith. JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. The instant appeal, stands directed, by the appellant, against the judgment of conviction pronounced, on 23.7.2008, by the learned Special Judge Chamba Division, Chamba, H.P, in, Session Trial No. 13 of 2008, wherethrough, findings, of conviction, were returned upon the appellant, for his committing offences punishable, under Section 20, of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act,1985, (i) and, also therethrough, the, accused/appellant, stood sentenced, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 years, and, to pay, a, fine of Rs. 25,000/-, for, the commission, of, an offence, punishable under Section 20 of the NDPS Act, and, in default of payment of fine, he stood further sentenced, to, undergo simple imprisonment, for, six months. 2. The facts relevant to the case, are, that on 1.2.2008 at about 5.30 PM at Chanju bridge, the police party headed by ASI Ashok Kumar was present in connection with patrolling duty. The police had put a picketing there at Chanju bridge. At that time, one person came there from Kuparigala side who was having a blue coloured bag on his left shoulder. On seeing the police party, the said person at once got frightened and tried to flee away. The said person was nabbed by ASI Ashok Kumar with the help of other police officials. His name and parantage was ascertained, who disclosed his name as Parshotam, son of Hari Singh. The bag which the accused was holding was checked in which pant, T-shirt and a polythene envelope of light gree colour were recovered. The polythene envelope on opening was found containing charas in the shape of sticks which on weighment found 1 kg 650 gms. Complying with the formalities, the I.O. separated two samples of 25 gms each. The bulk and the sample parcels were sealed with seal 'K'. Thereafter, the other codal formalities were also completed and the accused was arrested. The polythene envelope on opening was found containing charas in the shape of sticks which on weighment found 1 kg 650 gms. Complying with the formalities, the I.O. separated two samples of 25 gms each. The bulk and the sample parcels were sealed with seal 'K'. Thereafter, the other codal formalities were also completed and the accused was arrested. After completion of the investigation and after receipt of the FSL report, the charge-sheet was filed against the accused for having committed the offence under section 20 of the Act. 3. The accused was charged for committing an offence punishable under Section 20 of the ND & PS Act. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses. On conclusion of recording of prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. stood recorded by the trial Court, wherein, he made disclosures qua his false implication. However, he did not lead any defence evidence. 4. On an appraisal of evidence on record, the learned trial Court, recorded findings of conviction against the accused/appellant herein. 5. The accused/appellant, is, aggrieved by the judgment of conviction recorded, by the learned trial Court. The learned Counsel appearing, for the accused/ appellant has concertedly, and, vigorously hence contended qua the findings of conviction, recorded by the learned trial Court, standing not, based on a proper appreciation, by it, of the evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation, by it, of the material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of conviction, being reversed, 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 Additional Advocate General, has, with compatible force, and, vigor, also contended that the findings of conviction, as, recorded by the learned Court below, rather standing based, on a mature, and, balanced appreciation, "by it", of evidence on record, and, theirs not necessitating, an, interference, rather theirs 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. The recovery of the relevant item, of contraband, was made, from the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused, through memo, borne in Ext. 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. The recovery of the relevant item, of contraband, was made, from the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused, through memo, borne in Ext. PW10/A, (i) whereon, the uncontested signatures of accused, stand borne, and, hence the estopping statutory principles, engrafted in the provisions of Section 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, bar the accused to contest the voicing(s), borne therein, unless, the hereinafter alluded apt interconnectivities, do not emerge, at the stage of production of the case property in Court, (a) AND in contemporaneity, vis-a-vis, the afore seizure, standing effectuated, by the Investigating Officer concerned, from, the conscious and exclusive possession of the accused, rather NCB form, borne in Ext. PA, stood also drawn, (b) wherein reflections are cast, vis-a-vis, 6 seal impressions each, on the bulk, and, the sample parcels, hence carrying English alphabet "A", rather standing embossed thereon, and, thereon(s) also the uncontested signatures of the accused, stand borne, and, hence the estopping statutory principles, engrafted in the provisions of Section 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, bar the accused to contest the voicing(s), borne therein, unless the hereinafter alluded apt interconnectivities, do not emerge, at the stage of production of the case property in Court c) the Station House Officer concerned, upon receiving the seized contraband, at the police station concerned, also embossed thereon six re-sealing(s) seal impressions rather carrying English alphabet "K" and "A'. The afore seizures was/were, deposited, through Ext. PW6/A, in the Mallkhana concerned. Subsequent thereto, under road certificate, borne in Ext. PW10/C, the seized contraband, stood dispatched, to the FSL concerned, for, the latter hence making an opinion thereon. All the afore exhibits, carry narratives therein, vis-a-vis, the description, and, numbers, of the seal impressions, embossed, respectively upon the bulk, and, upon the sample parcels, and, all the afore visibly carry interse compatibilities, and, synonymity(ies). Furthermore, the FSL concerned, upon receiving, the case property, has, in its report, embodied, in Ext. All the afore exhibits, carry narratives therein, vis-a-vis, the description, and, numbers, of the seal impressions, embossed, respectively upon the bulk, and, upon the sample parcels, and, all the afore visibly carry interse compatibilities, and, synonymity(ies). Furthermore, the FSL concerned, upon receiving, the case property, has, in its report, embodied, in Ext. PW9/A, made echoing(s) therein rather bearing compatibility, vis-a-vis, the afore facets, as stand narrated, in the afore-referred exhibits, (d) and has also rendered, an opinion, qua the parcel, as, sent to it, for analysis, carrying therein rather all the ingredients, of, Charas, (e) and thereafter, echoing(s) are also borne therein, qua the FSL concerned, after extracting, the ingredients/contents, as stood carried, in the sample parcel, as stood, sent to it, for analysis, and, thereafter upon its making an opinion thereon, rather, it subsequent thereto, re-inserting the ingredients, in, the cloth parcel, and, it embossing thereon, the, seal impression(s), of, the FSL. The charge would be concluded to be efficaciously hence proven by the prosecution, (f) upon each of the prosecution witnesses concerned, where to whom, the case properties, stood shown in Court, hence in their respective testifications, making clear/candid echoing(s), qua the relevant congruities, and, similarities, interse, the numbers, and, descriptions of the seal impressions, as stand echoed, in the afore exhibits, also existing, upon, the case property, rather upon, its production in Court. However, at the time of production, of the case property in Court, and, thereat its being shown, to the prosecution witnesses concerned, though, as aforestated, the relevant connectivity’s, stand echoed, by the prosecution witnesses concerned, (g) and when thereat, the accused persons stood also represented, by the defence counsel, (h) hence when the learned defence counsel, rather thereat held the opportune moment, to, on sighting the case property, hence make therethrough(s) decipherments, and, discerning(s), vis-a-vis, the afore congruities, or compatibilities, being amiss therein (i) or not, rather, visibly even at the afore stage, the learned defence counsel, did not, either object to the production, or exhibition, of the case property in Court, (j) nor thereafter proceeded to make any strivings, to elicit, from the prosecution witnesses concerned, any echoing(s), qua the relevant connectivities, (k) not existing(s), nor the learned defence counsel endeavored, to, hence ensure qua the Court hence making any observation, during, the course of recording, of the testifications, of the prosecution witnesses', concerned, qua the aforestated relevant compatibilities, and, interconnectivities, interse the bulk, and, seal parcels, and, appertaining to the numbers, and, descriptions, of, six seal impressions, carrying English alphabet, "K", narrated in Ext.PW10/A , (i) rather not emerging, at the stage of production, of the case property in Court. In sequel to the afore, an inference is sparked, qua the learned defence counsel, rather acquiescing qua the relevant apposite congruities, and, connectivity’s, emerging inter-se, the, numbers and descriptions, of the seal impressions, carrying therein English alphabet "A", and, as stood embossed, on the samples, and, bulk parcels, and, qua wherewith, a synonymous narrative, is, carried in Ext. PW-1, hence at the imperative stage, of, "production of case property" in Court. 9. In summa, the emergence of clinching and potent evidence, vis-a-vis, the afore apt connectivity’s, hence surfacing, thereupon the effect, if any, of any minimal discrepancies, improvements or embellishments, vis-a-vis their previous statements recorded in writing or any minimal interse or any intrase contradiction, if any, occurring in the depositions, of the prosecution witnesses concerned, naturally, and, logically all get subsumed, and, subsided. 10. Nowat, the effect of an independent witness, to recovery memo Ext. 10. Nowat, the effect of an independent witness, to recovery memo Ext. PW10/A, rather reneging from his previously recorded statement in writing, is, to stand construed alongwith the factum, of his, in his cross-examinations, to which he stood subjected, to, by the learned Public Prosecutor "upon" his standing declared hostile, hence admitting the factum, of, his authentic signatures occurring thereon. Conspicuously, when, upon, his admitting the occurrence, of, his signatures, on the relevant memos, (a) thereupon the mandate of Sections 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, whereupon, he "on" admitting, the occurrence of his authentic signatures thereon, hence stood statutorily estopped, to hence, renege from the recitals, borne thereon, (b) stands rather attracted (c) whereupon the effect of his orally deposing, in variance or in detraction vis-a-vis, the recitals hence occurring therein, gets statutorily belittled (d) rather when he naturally and emphatically hence statutorily, proves the recitals, comprised in the apposite memos, thereupon his orally reneging from the recitals borne thereon "holds no evidentiary clout" (e) nor it holds any legal weight, to hence countervail the creditworthiness, of the testimonies of the official witnesses, qua the recovery of contraband, made under recovery memo Ext. PW10/A, hence standing effectuated therethrough, from the conscious, and, exclusive possession, of, the accused. Contrarily the uncontroverted factum, of, his authentic signatures, occurring in the relevant exhibits, concomitantly renders the apposite recitals, borne therein, rather, to hold a grave probative worth. The ensuing sequel thereof, is that with the principle, of, statutory estoppel, hence constituted in Sections 91 and 92, of the Indian Evidence Act, rather barring an independent witness, to orally resile, from the contents of Ext. PW10/A, (f) especially when he admits qua his apposite signatures occurring thereon, (g) thereupon renders unworthwhile besides insignificant, the factum, qua his orally deposing in variance vis-a-vis, its recorded recitals, (h) per se whereupon an inference stands enhanced qua dehors, his reneging from his previous statements recorded in writing, a deductions standing capitalized, qua thereupon, his proving the genesis, of the prosecution case, and, also strengthens, the reason assigned, by the learned Special Judge, for his thereupon, accepting the recitals occurring, in, Ext. PW10/A, 11. PW10/A, 11. Be that as it may, the vigour of the aforesaid conclusion, would stand benumbed, only upon hence evidence existing on record, with respect to the independent witnesses concerned, standing pressurized or coerced by the Investigating Officer concerned "to" emboss his/their authentic signatures, upon, seizure memo, borne in Ext.PW10/A. However, the independent witness concerned, though, in his testification, makes an attempt, to communicate qua his signatures, as, occur thereon standing obtained, despite, contents thereof being not read over, to him, and, upon his being pressurized, (a) yet the aforesaid communication "is bereft of any vigor" especially, when he, "does not", make any further unveilings in his testification, that, in the Investigating Officer concerned, purportedly omitting, to, read over to him, the contents of the aforesaid exhibits, "besides" hence, his obviously without purportedly understanding, their contents rather his appending his signatures thereon, (b) thereupon, upon, construing, the afore omissions, in entwinement, with his further omission, to record, a, complaint with the Officers superior, to the Investigating Officer concerned, rather (d) begets, an, inference, qua the effect, if, any, of the aforesaid communications, hence occurring in the testifications, of, the independent witness concerned, dehors, the afore be speakings not standing borne therein, rather not belittling, the, hereinabove drawn inference, anvilled upon, attraction "upon" the admitted factum, of, his authentic signatures, occurring, on Ext. PW10/A, , hence "the" mandate of Section 91 and 92, of, the Indian Evidence Act, (c) thereupon dehors his making the aforesaid, frail attempts, for, belying the recitals borne, in Ext. PW10/A, his rather hence statutorily proving all the recitals, as, occur therein. 12. Even though, the learned counsel appearing, for the appellant, has contended with much vigor, before this Court, that since PW-1, an independent witness, to the relevant proceedings, has, rendered, an, acquiescing, answer, to, a court query, qua his being pressurized, to, make his signatures, on the relevant memo, (i) thereupon his acquiescing, qua, the, occurrence, of, his uncontested signatures, on, the relevant memo, and, parcels hence rather not rendering, the vigor, of, the prosecution case rather being enhanced. However, the afore ground, is rudderless, as during, the course of his cross-examination, where to which, he stood subjected, to, by the learned Public Prosecutor concerned, upon, his being declared hostile, (ii) his making acquiescing therein, qua his signatures occurring, on, the relevant memo, and, on the relevant parcels, (iii) the effects whereof(s), when stand entwined with, vis-a-vis, PW-2, rather the defence, not endeavoring, to, mete any suggestion to him, qua the latters' signatures being also obtained, upon, pressure standing exerted, upon, him hence by the Investigating Officer, (iv) and, when therewith also stands coagulated, the, factum, vis-a-vis the Investigating Officer also remaining unmeted, any apt thereto suggestion, rather begetting a conclusion qua the afore dis-affirmative answers meted, by PW-2, to, the court query, qua, the Investigating Officer obtaining his signatures, upon, the relevant memo, and, parcels, upon, his exerting pressure upon him, rather being vulnerable, to, skepticism, (v) more so, when he has meted, a, dis-affirmative answer, vis-a-vis, a court query qua his making a complaint qua thereof, vis-a-vis, the superiors, of, the Investigating Officer. Furthermore, upon PW-3 being subjected, to cross-examination, and, his making a testification, vis-a-vis, the independent witness' arriving hence at spot, rather by chance, hence it appears, qua, the defence acquiescing, vis-a-vis, the, appending/ making, of, signatures, both by PW-1, and, by PW-2, on the relevant memo, and, on the parcels, being acquiesced, by both, to be hence made thereon, rather at the relevant site of occurrence, (vi) and, thereupon a conclusion is recorded qua the signatures, as are made thereon, being acquiesced by them, to be not made, on blank memos, (vii) and, also it appears qua an inference, of, acquiescing, being engendered, qua both making their signatures, upon, the relevant cloth parcels, emphatically upon, the latter(s) thereat enveloping there within, hence, the, recovered charas. The effect of the afore discussion is qua, when, independent witnesses, stood associated, by the Investigating Officer, in the relevant proceedings, and, when they rather turned hostile, vis-a-vis, the prosecution, (viii) thereupon they are not construable, to be interested in, the, success, of, the prosecution case, and, also qua theirs being not inimical nor holding any prejudice, vis-a-vis, the accused, also hence it appears, qua it, being not enjoined, upon, the Investigating Officer, to join, other independent witnesses, though, holding hence abodes, in, proximity, to, the relevant site of occurrence. 13. 13. For the reasons which have been recorded hereinabove, this Court holds that the learned trial Court 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 trial Court, does not, suffer from any gross perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation and non appreciation of evidence on record. Consequently, there is no merit in the instant appeal, hence, it is dismissed, and, the impugned verdict, is, affirmed, and, maintained. Records be sent back forthwith.