JUDGMENT Sureshwar Thakur, J. - Through an order made on 4.07.2016, the learned Special Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P., framed charges against Madan Lal, vis-a-vis, offence(s) constituted under Section 20, of, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, and, read with Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. Moreover, through, the afore made order, the learned trial Court also framed a charge against accused Madan Lal, for his committing, an, offence punishable, under, Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, besides through, the afore made order, the learned trial Court also framed a charge against accused Madan Lal, for his committing an offence punishable, under, Section 39 of the Himachal Pradesh Excise Act, inasmuch, as, for his being found in exclusive and conscious possession, of, 24 bottles of English liquor, Marked Ginnies Fine Whisky. Moreover, the learned trial Court framed a charge on 4.7.2016, vis-a-vis, accused Praveen Kumar, for his committing, an offence punishable, under, Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs, and, Psychotropic Substances Act, read with Section 29 thereto, and, in addition, through an order made, on 4.7.2016, the learned trial Court, framed a charge against accused Lal Chand, for his committing, an offence punishable, under, Section 18, and, under Section 29, of, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. However, through a verdict made on 22.10.2019, upon, Sessions Trial No. 3-3 of 2016, the learned trial Court, made an order of acquittal, vis-a-vis, co-accused Praveen Kumar, and, also, vis-a-vis, co-accused Lal Chand, vis-a-vis, the afore drawn charges against them, and, also the learned trial Court, through the afore verdict, made an order of acquittal, upon, accused Madan Lal, for the charge, drawn, under, Section 29, of, the Narcotic Drugs, and, Psychotropic Substances Act, and, also for the charge drawn, under, Section 39, of, the Himachal Pradesh Excise Act, 2011. However, under the afore verdict, accused/convict Madan Lal, became convicted, for commission of offences punishable under Section 18(c), and, under Section 20(ii) (c), of, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The learned trial Court imposed, upon, him sentence, of, rigorous imprisonment, hence, extending upto 10 years, and, also sentenced him, to pay a fine of Rs. However, under the afore verdict, accused/convict Madan Lal, became convicted, for commission of offences punishable under Section 18(c), and, under Section 20(ii) (c), of, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The learned trial Court imposed, upon, him sentence, of, rigorous imprisonment, hence, extending upto 10 years, and, also sentenced him, to pay a fine of Rs. One lakh, and, in default of payment of fine amount, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment, for one year, for, commission of an offence punishable, under, Section 20(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a term of two years, and, to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, and, in default of payment, of, fine amount, he was further sentenced, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year, for commission, of, an offence punishable under Section 18(C), of, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. All the afore sentences become ordered to run concurrently. 2. Obviously, convict Madan Lal becomes aggrieved, from the afore made verdict, of,conviction, upon, him, vis-a-vis, the afore charges, and, also obviously becomes aggrieved, from the afore order, imposing, upon, him, the afore alluded sentences, of, imprisonment, and, of fine, and, hence becomes constrained to, thereagainst, constitute an appeal, before this Court. 3. Through memo, borne in Ex. PW3/A, the Investigating Officer, made recoveries of 100 grams, of, charas, from the person of co-accused Madan Lal, hence as echoed therein, from, his keeping it, in the pocket(s), of, his shirt, as, became, worn by him, at the relevant time. However, the Investigating Officer concerned, did not, prior thereto, elicit, the, mandatorily enjoined consent, from him, for his, valid personal search being conducted, by him, hence through, a, memo drawn by him. However, the Investigating Officer concerned, did not, prior thereto, elicit, the, mandatorily enjoined consent, from him, for his, valid personal search being conducted, by him, hence through, a, memo drawn by him. Since, the elicitation of the apposite consent, from co-accused Madan Lal, for his valid personal search, being made, by the investigating officer, became a dire statutory necessity, inasmuch, as, the recovery of contraband, weighing 100 grams, of, cannabis, became recovered, from his person, hence, through, a, memo borne in Ex.PW3/A, (i) whereas, visibly, with the Investigating Officer, rather not drawing, the apposite memo, seeking therethrough, the, statutorily ordained mandatory consent, of, co-accused Madan Lal, for, hence, facilitating him, to carry search, of his person, for rather therethrough(s) hence validity becoming foisted, to the recovery, of, cannabis, weighing 100 grams, from the pocket of the shirt, worn, by co-accused Madan Lal, at the relevant time, rather does fully whittle the efficacy, of drawings, of, Ex.PW3/A. Moreover, contrarily, with the Investigating Officer rather drawing a consent memo, vis-a-vis, co-accused Praveen Kumar, and, also his eliciting, the, consent of the afore co-accused, obviously bringforths, a, blatant breach, becoming committed, vis-a-vis, the statutory mandatory provisions, engrafted in Section 50, of, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, (ii) besides makes candid display, of, the thorough non application of mind, and, of course, of, the slip shod manner of Investigations, being made by the Investigating Officer, into the relevant offences. Obviously, sequel thereof, is, as aptly concluded by the learned trial Court, vis-a-vis, an order of acquittal, becoming, amenable, to become pronounced, vis-a-vis, recovery of 100 grams, of, charas, as, became effectuated, from, the purported person, of, accused Madan Lal, through, memo borne, in Ex.PW3/A. 4. Be that as it may, co-accused Madan Lal, through memo Ex.PW3/C, stood arrested, at the site of occurrence, by the Investigating Officer. In spontaneity to the Investigating Officer, through memo Ex.PW3/C, hence arresting co-accused Madan Lal, he through memo drawn Ex.PW3/E, made interrogations, upon, co-accused Madan Lal, hence therethough elicited from him, inculpatory confession(s), vis-a-vis, his apart, from the recovery, of, charas, effectuated, through memo Ex.PW3/A, his also hiding, and, camouflaging contraband, hence, at his residence. The afore inculpatory disclosure(s) made, during, the interrogation, of, co-accused Madan Lal, and, as, embodied in Ex.PW3/E, hence, obviously render Ex.PW3/E, to, become construable, to, be a valid inculpatory statement, drawn under Section 27, of, the Indian Evidence Act. The afore inculpatory disclosure(s) made, during, the interrogation, of, co-accused Madan Lal, and, as, embodied in Ex.PW3/E, hence, obviously render Ex.PW3/E, to, become construable, to, be a valid inculpatory statement, drawn under Section 27, of, the Indian Evidence Act. The witnesses, to, the drawings, of, Ex.PW3/E, are one Roshan Lal, and, one LHC Sanjeev Kumar, No. 455, both of whom testify, vis-a-vis, veracities, of, all recitals, borne therein, and, thereupon, they prove the validity, of makings, of, Ex.PW3/E. In pursuance to the Investigating Officer, drawing the afore memo, under Section 27, of, the Indian Evidence Act, and, as becomes borne in Ex. PW3/E,, and, as became uncontrovertedly signatured, by the accused, and, also by the witnesses thereto, he, as evinced by Ex.PW2/A, became led by co-accused Madan Lal, to his residential premises, and, wherefrom 1800 grams of charas, and, 50 grams, of, opium, became recovered from an Attachi case, and, also therein became enclosed, the, recovered therefroms currency notes, carrying, a, value of Rs. 1.67,400/-. 5. A perusal of Ex.PW2/A underscores, vis-a-vis, at the site, whereat Ex.PW2/A became prepared, the Investigating Officer enclosing 1800 grams, of, charas, in a plastic bag, and, thereafter his enclosing, it, in a cloth parcel, and, thereons, his embossing 4 seal impressions, carrying English alphabet "H", (i) besides his drawing samples, of seals, on cloth parcel. Moreover, Ex.PW2/A also makes graphic underlining(s), vis-a-vis, therethrough, recovery, of, charas, hence becoming effectuated, from, an attachi case, found inside the house of the accused, wheretowhich, the accused in pursuance, to his, making a valid disclosure statement, under Section 27, of, the Indian Evidence, as, borne in Ex.PW3/E, rather led the Investigating Officer, and, also therefrom, recoveries, becoming effectuated, of, opium, hence by the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer, in contemporaneity, vis-a-vis, his drawing Ex.PW2/A, he re-enclosed opium in a plastic bag, wherefrom it became retrieved, and, he thereafter re-enclosed it, in a cloth parcel, and, thereon he embossed four seal impressions, of, English alphabet "H". NCB form borne in Ex.PW4/E, appertaining to the recovery, of, charas weighing 1800 grams, and, NCB form, borne in Ex.PW4/F, appertaining to the recovery, of, opium, weighing 50 gram, both became prepared at the site, of, occurrence. NCB form borne in Ex.PW4/E, appertaining to the recovery, of, charas weighing 1800 grams, and, NCB form, borne in Ex.PW4/F, appertaining to the recovery, of, opium, weighing 50 gram, both became prepared at the site, of, occurrence. A perusal of the NCB form, borne in Ex.PW4/E, and, appertaining to the recovery of charas, weighing 1800 grams, and, of NCB form, borne in Ex.PW4/F, and, appertaining to the recovery of opium, weighing 50 grams, (ii) underscores, vis-a-vis, all the description(s) qua the numbers of seal impressions, and, of English Alphabet occurring thereons, bearing compatibility, vis-a-vis, the narrations qua therewith hence occurring in Ex. PW2/A. Both, opium, weighing 50 grams, and, charas weighing 1800 grams, recoveries whereof, become made through a common memo, borne in Ex.PW2/A, became transmitted, to the police station concerned, and, a perusal of the NCB forms, as, drawn qua therewith, and, respectively borne, in, Ex.PW 14/E, and, Ex.PW14/F, make(s) disclosures, vis-a-vis, thereons, the SHO of the Police Station concerned, embossing thereat, re-seal, seal impression, and, each carrying thereon English Alphabet "T". Both the apposite recovered parcels, respectively containing 1800 grams of charas, and, 50 grams of opium, after their re-sealing, being made at the police station concerned by the SHO concerned, became deposited with the Incharge, of, the Malkhana concerned, and, a perusal of the abstract, of, the Malkhana register,borne in Ex.PW15/A, makes clear upsurgings, vis-a-vis, thereat, also occurring all afore congruities, and, compatibilities, inter se the number(s) of seal impressions, and, of re-seal, seal impressions, as, borne in recovery memo, embodied in Ex.PW2/A, and, vis-a-vis, both the NCB form(s), respectively borne in Ex.PW4/E, and, in Ex.PW4/F, (iii) and, emphatically appertaining to the numbers of seal impressions, as, initially made on the cloth parcels, and, also vis-a-vis, the re-seal, seal impressions, as, made thereon(s), rather all bearing visible synchronization(s), and, compatibilities with respect to the number(s) thereof, and, also with respect, to, the embossings, thereons, of English alphabet(s), as, become pronounced, in all the afore drawn memos. 6. 6. Through road certificate, borne in Ex.PW15/B, the case property, stood transmitted, to the FSL concerned, and, upon, the contents, of, the afore apposite cloth parcels, becoming examined thereat, by the Chemical Examiner hence working thereat, as apparent, on a reading of Ex.PW21/W, he made, an opinion, vis-a-vis, the charas, as enclosed, in the cloth parcel concerned, and, also vis-a-vis, the opium, as became enclosed, in a cloth parcel, after each becoming retrieved therefroms, for, analysis, qua their contents being respectively found, to be, of, charas, and, of, opium. Apart from the above, for, the purpose of determining, the, potency, of, existence, of, the afore alluded synchronization(s), and, compatibilities, vis-a-vis, afore prima donna factum probandum, the, extraction of paragraph No. 7 of Ex.PW21/W is imperative, paragraph whereof, reads, as under:- "7. Description of parcel: one sealed cloth parcel, marked in the laboratory as A bearing five seals of "S", and five seals of "T", two sealed cloth parcels marked in the laboratory as B & C, each bearing four seals of "H" and four seals of "T". The seals were found intact and tallied with specimen seals sent by the forwarding authority and seals impression impressed on the forms NCB-1. The parcels were kept in safe custody of the Assistant Chemical Examiner till the report of the same was signed and dispatched. A perusal thereof, underscores, vis-a-vis, upon, receipt of the apposite cloth parcels, at the laboratory concerned, both carrying thereon(s) analogus descriptions appertaining, to the number(s) of seal impressions, and, of re-seal, seal impressions, and, also, vis-a-vis, the, respectively made English Alaphabet(s) thereons, or rather all bearing synchronization(s), vis-a-vis, the description(s) as made qua therewith, in Ex.PW2/A, and, in the apposite NCB forms, respectively, borne in Ex.PW4/E, and, in Ex.PW4/F. Furthermore, the effect(s), of, existence(s), of, the afore congruities, and, compatibilities, and, as become unfolded, through a reading, of, paragraph No.7, of, Ex.PW21/W, is, qua theirs underscoring, an unflinching conclusion, vis-a-vis, the case property, travelling from the Malkhana, of the Police Station concerned, upto, the FSL concerned, in an untampered condition. Moreover, a perusal of Ex.PW21/w, underscores, vis-a-vis, the chemical analyst concerned, after re-enclosing, in the cloth parcels, the relevant contraband(s), after his making analysis thereof, his embossing thereons, seals of the FSL concerned, and, his returning them, to the Malkahana, hence, existing at the police station concerned. Moreover, a perusal of Ex.PW21/w, underscores, vis-a-vis, the chemical analyst concerned, after re-enclosing, in the cloth parcels, the relevant contraband(s), after his making analysis thereof, his embossing thereons, seals of the FSL concerned, and, his returning them, to the Malkahana, hence, existing at the police station concerned. It was from the Malkhana, of, the police station concerned, that the case property(ies), became produced, before the learned trial court concerned. 7. Be that as it may, even at the stage contemporaneous, to the production, of, the case property, in court, thereat also, it enjoined, qua its carrying, all the afore alluded apposite analogities, and, similarities, and, in case, in contemporaneity, vis-a-vis, the production, of, the case property, before the learned trial court, the afore analogities, and, similarities, remain intact, thereupon, this Court, would become coaxed, to conclude, that the prosecution, has been able to prove the guilt of the accused, beyond all reasonable doubts. 8. For fathoming, the afore factum, a reading of the court observations, as, made by the learned trial Court, during, the course, of, the examination-in-chief of PW-3, is imperative. A reading whereof, makes palpable disclosure, vis-a-vis, the initially made seals impressions, on the respective cloth parcels, appertaining, to, numbers thereof, and, also appertaining, to, English Alphabets, made thereon(s), (a) and, besides qua re-seal, seal impressions, made thereon(s), by the SHO concerned, both in respect of numbers thereof, and, also in respect of English Alphabet(s), as, made thereon(s), (b) and, in addition, the, re-seal, seal impressions, of the FSL concerned, as made thereon, all becoming found existing thereon(s), and, all the seals, also being found, to, be untampered, and, intact. The afore made court observations, remained uncontested, by the learned defence counsel, inasmuch, he did not object, to, the veracity of the afore made court observations. Consequently, the learned counsel, appearing for the appellant, cannot contend, that either all the afore apposite analogities and compatibilities, not existing in contemporaneity, vis-a-vis, the production, of, the case property in court, (c) and, also cannot contend, vis-a-vis, the seal impressions or re-seal, seal impressions, being tampered, (d) especially when the learned trial court has made observations, vis-a-vis, theirs being untampered, and, intact. The sequel thereof, is, vis-a-vis, the imperative link, as, commencing, from the recovery of the contraband, as, made, from the exclusive, and, conscious possession, of, the accused, at the site of occurrence, hence through seizure memo borne in Ex.PW2/A, remaining alive, and, subsisting even during the course, of, production, of, the case property in court, thereupon, the charge becoming invincibly proven against the accused. 9. However, nowat, the effect, of, independent witnesses, to, the drawing, of, recovery memo Ext.PW-2/A, reneging from their respectively made previous statement(s) in writing, is, to be construed alongwith, the factum of theirs, in their respective cross-examination(s), whereto they became subjected, to, by the learned Public Prosecutor, "on" theirs, standing declared hostile, hence admitting the factum of their authentic signatures, rather occurring thereon. Consequently, when they admit the occurrence, of their, authentic signatures, on the relevant memo(s), and, also upon the cloth parcels, hence containing therewithin(s), the recovered contraband, (a) thereupon the mandate of Section 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, becomes attracted, (i) whereupon they "on" admitting, the, occurrence(s), of, their signatures thereon, hence become statutorily estopped to renege, from, all the recital(s) borne therein(s), (ii) thereupon the effect of their orally deposing in variance or in detraction, of, the recitals which occur therein, rather gets statutorily belittled, (iii) rather when they naturally hence emphatically statutorily, prove(s) all the recitals, comprised, in, the apposite memo(s), (iv) thereupon theirs orally reneging, from, the recitals borne thereon "holds no evidentiary clout" nor it is legally apt to outweigh, the creditworthiness of the testimony(s), of, the official witnesses, qua the recovery of contraband, hence, made, through, recovery memo Ext. PW2/A, and, its making bespeaking(s), qua its standing effectuated, from, the conscious and exclusive possession, of, the accused. In sequel, the uncontroverted factum, of their authentic signatures, occurring on the relevant exhibits, rather containing therewithin(s), the, recovered contraband, concomitantly renders the apposite recitals borne thereon(s) rather to hold, the, gravest probative worth. PW2/A, and, its making bespeaking(s), qua its standing effectuated, from, the conscious and exclusive possession, of, the accused. In sequel, the uncontroverted factum, of their authentic signatures, occurring on the relevant exhibits, rather containing therewithin(s), the, recovered contraband, concomitantly renders the apposite recitals borne thereon(s) rather to hold, the, gravest probative worth. The ensuing sequel thereof, is that with the statutory estoppel constituted in Sections 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, barring, the, independent witnesses' concerned, to orally resile, from, the contents of Ext.PW-2/A, (v) especially when they admit qua their authentic signatures occurring thereon, rather renders unworthwhile besides insignificant, the factum qua their orally deposing, in variance, vis--vis, its recorded recitals, (vi) thereupon per se an inference, stands enhanced, qua dehors theirs reneging from their previous statement(s) recorded in writing, rather a, deduction(s) standing capitalized qua thereupon their rather proving the genesis, of, the prosecution case. 10. 10. Be that as it may, the vigour of the aforesaid conclusion, would stand benumbed, only upon evidence existing on record, with respect to the independent witnesses concerned, standing pressurized or coerced, by the Investigating Officer concerned, "to" emboss their signatures, upon, seizure memo Ext.PW-2/A. However, the independent witnesses concerned, through their testification(s), make an attempt to communicate, that, their signatures, as, borne thereon(s), rather becoming obtained, despite, contents thereof, being not read over to them, yet, the aforesaid communication, "is bereft of any vigour", especially when they "do not" make, any unveilings in their respective testification(s), (i) that, in the Investigating Officer concerned, purportedly omitting to read over to them, the contents, of, the aforesaid exhibits, "besides", hence theirs obviously without understanding their contents, theirs appending their signatures thereon, and, hence the embossing(s) thereon(s), of, their signatures, "hence spurring", from compulsion or duress, standing exerted upon them, by the Investigating Officer, (ii) whereas, "importantly" omissions thereof(s), and, also when in respect thereof, they omitted to record a complaint, with the Officer(s) superior, to, the Investigating Officer concerned, rather begets an inference, vis-a-vis, the effect of the aforesaid communications, occurring in the testification(s), of, the independent witnesses, hence, naturally not, belittling the hereinabove drawn inference, anvilled upon attraction, "upon" the admitted factum, of their authentic signatures, hence occurring, on Ext.PW-2/A, rather "the" mandate of Section 91 and 92, of, the Indian Evidence Act, (iii) thereupon dehors their making the aforesaid, frail attempt(s), rather for belying the recitals, borne in Ext.PW-2/A, theirs rather hence statutorily proving, all the recitals occurring therein. 11. Even though, all the afore imperative links become unflinchingly established, by the prosecution, and, as commencing from the recovery, as made at the site of occurrence, and, upto the production of the case property in Court. Nonetheless, the learned counsel appearing for the accused, makes a vehement submission before this Court, qua with Sanjeev Kumar making a deposition, in his cross-examination, and, his underscoring therein, vis-a-vis, despite the availability of independent witnesses, in proximity, to the relevant site of occurrence, yet, none of them becoming joined, in the relevant proceedings, (a) hence per se, thereupon, the relevant investigations, being construed, to be made with an oblique motive, and, also being construable to be unworthy, of any credibility, being imputed thereto. However, the afore submission is, rejected, as, unless the afore similarities, and, congruities, and, appertaining to the afore factum probandum, being de-established, thereupon, they alone prove the guilt of the accused, dehors non association, of, independent witnesses, despite their easy availability. However, since, all the afore imperative links in the prosecution case, became cogently established, and, emphatically, when all the afore links, remain intact, right from the seizure being made, of, the case property, at the site of occurrence, and, upto their production in court, thereupon, non association of the independent witnesses, is not imperative, nor in their non association in the investigations, hence, the Investigating Officer, can be held to be holding any slanted investigations, into, the afore offences. 12. The learned counsel appearing for the accused/convict has submitted before this court, that no reliance can be placed, upon, the abstract of malkhana register, borne in ex.PW15/A, as, it does not carry the signatures, of the Incharge, of, the Malkhana concerned, and, essentially against the entries made, vis-a-vis, the case property. However, the afore submission, cannot carry any weight, as, the Incharge of the Malkhana, stepped into the witnesses box as PW-15, and, produced the original Malkhana register, before the trial Court, and, has efficaciously proven the relevant abstract, of, Malkhana Register, borne in Ex.PW15/A, and, also has ensured the makings, of, exhibit marks thereon. The effect thereof is that since PW-15, is, the custodian of the Malkhana register, and, obviously when, upon, the original Malkhana Register becoming produced in Court, by its valid custodian, hence, the scribings thereins, vis-a-vis, the descriptions of the case property, cannot become construable to be either forged or factiously drawn, unless suggestion qua therewith became meted to PW-15, by the learned defence counsel, upon, his holding him to cross-examination. However, none of the afore suggestions, become meted to PW-15, by the learned defence counsel, during, the course of his subjecting, PW-15 to cross-examination, thereupon, dehors, any signatures being not made against the description, of the case property, hence, in the Malkhana Register, would not falsify the afore made entries occurring therein(s). 13. Lastly, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, submits that the relevant premises wherefrom recoveries, were made, through, Ex.PW2/A, is not owned by the appellant, rather it, in the relevant records, stands recorded in the name of his mother, thereupon, all the recitals, borne in Ex.PW2/A, become per se falsified. 13. Lastly, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, submits that the relevant premises wherefrom recoveries, were made, through, Ex.PW2/A, is not owned by the appellant, rather it, in the relevant records, stands recorded in the name of his mother, thereupon, all the recitals, borne in Ex.PW2/A, become per se falsified. However, the afore submission as made before this court, cannot be accepted, as, the recovery of the afore contraband, from, the residential house of the accused is made through memo Ex.PW2/A, in the presence of independent witnesses thereto, and, their undisputed signatures also occur on Ex.PW2/A. Moreover, also all the afore proven link evidence(s), belies the merit, if any, of the afore made submissions, before this Court. Paramountly, the Hon'ble Apex Court, in a judgment, rendered in case titled, as " Jeet Ram versus the Narcotics Control Bureau, Chandigarh , in Criminal Appeal No. 688 of 2013, making an expostulation, of, law, vis--vis, the apt onus, becoming cast upon the convict, to explain, the, apposite possession, of, the relevant premises, at the relevant time, and upon failure, of, his discharging the afore onus, as, has happened hereat, (i) thereupon, the presumption, borne in Section 54, of, the ND & PS Act, becoming drawn against him, does also, de-facilitate(s), the counsel for the convict to make the afore address, rather this Court, is, constrained to infer qua the convict, being in possession, of, the relevant premises, hence, at the relevant time. 14. 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, and, the analysis thereof, by the learned trial Court, hence does not suffer, from, a perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation and non-appreciation, of evidence, on record. 15. Consequently, there is no merit in the extant appeal, and, it is dismissed accordingly. The judgment impugned before this Court is maintained and affirmed. All pending applications also stand disposed of. The records be sent down forthwith.