JUDGMENT : Satyen Vaidya, J. By way of instant appeal, exception has been taken to the judgment of acquittal dated 20.09.2018 passed by learned Special Judge-II, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. in case No. Rg. N/NDPS/18/2017. 2. The case of the Appellant-State, on the basis of which prosecution was launched, is as under: - 2.(i) On 25.12.2016, police party led by SI Satpal (PW-14) of Police Post Banikhet, District Chamba, was on routine patrol duty. While coming from Khairi bridge towards Padar at about 9.30 P.M., they noticed a person coming towards them with a carry bag in his hand near Mahajan Karyana Store. SI Sat Pal (PW-14), asked the person, the reason for his roaming on the road in late hours. He got perplexed and tried to run away from the spot. The police party apprehended the person. Despite efforts to associate independent witnesses, none could be procured. 2.(ii) The person apprehended by the police disclosed his name as Lakhvinder (accused). The bag carried by the accused was checked in presence of HC Inder (PW-13) and Parbhat (PW-1), who were associated as witnesses. Another bag having green colour was found inside the outer pink bag and inside the green coloured bag, black coloured hard substance was recovered, which on initial analysis was found to be Charas. The recovered Charas was weighed and found 1 kg. 240 grams. Spot photographs were taken. The recovered Charas was placed in the same bag from which it was recovered and the entire bag containing Charas was sealed in a cloth parcel with six seal impressions of seal “DK”. NCB form were filled by SI Sat Pal (PW-13) in triplicate. Facsimile of seal was preserved. The sealed packet containing Charas, NCB form, in triplicate, and sample seal were taken into possession. 2.(iii) Rukka was prepared and sent to Police Station, Dalhousie for recording the FIR. Constable Pawan Kumar was assigned duty to take rukka to the Police Station. Spot map was prepared by the Investigation Officer. The accused was interrogated and arrest memo was prepared. The information of his arrest was given to his mother. Thereafter, personal search of the accused was conducted, nothing incriminating was found. The case file was received through Constable Pawan Kumar on the spot. SI Sat Pal (PW-14) recorded the statement of C. Pawan Kumar. 2.(iv) The police team alongwith accused and case property reached the Police Station, Dalhousie. The information of his arrest was given to his mother. Thereafter, personal search of the accused was conducted, nothing incriminating was found. The case file was received through Constable Pawan Kumar on the spot. SI Sat Pal (PW-14) recorded the statement of C. Pawan Kumar. 2.(iv) The police team alongwith accused and case property reached the Police Station, Dalhousie. The recovered contraband was handed over by SI Sat Pal (PW-14) to SHO Sunny Guleria (PW-9), who conducted the re-sealing proceedings and handed over the recovered contraband with MHC, Dalhousie for safe deposit in Malkhana. 2.(v) On 26.12.2016, the accused alongwith case property was produced before learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (for short ‘JMIC’), Dalhousie. Proceedings under Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, (for short ‘NDPS Act’) were drawn. Necessary certificate was issued by learned JMIC, Dalhousie. 2. (vi) On 27.12.2016, SI Sat Pal (PW-14) prepared the special report under Section 57 of the Act and sent the same to SDPO, Dalhousie. The contraband was sent for chemical analysis to FSL, Junga, which were found to be sample of Charas with resin found therein 23.95% w/w. 2.(vii) After completion of investigation, challan was prepared and put in the Court. 3. In support of its case, the prosecution examined total 14 witnesses. The statement of accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 4. PW-1, HHC Prabhat Chand, PW-2, HHC Pawan Kumar, PW-13 HC Inder Singh and PW-14 SI Sat Pal were examined as spot witnesses. PW-3 C. Rajesh Kumar and PW-9 SI Sunny Guleria were examined to prove the receipt of recovered contraband alongwith necessary documentation in Police Station, Dalhousie and the re-sealing process conducted there. PW-9 SI Sunny Guleria, additionally stated the facts to prove the handing over of the contraband after re-sealing to MHC for safe custody, preparation of special report and preparation of challan etc. PW-4 C. Naresh Kumar proved the transit of contraband from Police Station to FSL, Junga for scientific analysis and its safe custody during the period. PW-5 C. Anil Kumar No. 405, proved the transit of contraband and scientific opinion thereon from FSL, Junga to Police Station and its safe custody during the period. PW- 6 C. Dalip Kumar was examined to prove the receipt of rukka as well as special report in the office of SDPO, Dalhousie. PW-7 HC Hem Raj, was examined to prove the safe custody etc. PW- 6 C. Dalip Kumar was examined to prove the receipt of rukka as well as special report in the office of SDPO, Dalhousie. PW-7 HC Hem Raj, was examined to prove the safe custody etc. of the contraband in Malkhana of Police Station, Dalhousie. PW-8 HC Bhagwan Chand proved the deposit of contraband in Malkhana after its receipt from FSL, Junga. PW-10 HC Arun Kumar also proved the transit etc. of the case property from Malkhana for the purpose of proceedings under Section 52A of the Act. PW-12 HHC Chaman Singh, proved the entry of rapat No.12, Ex. PW-12/A dated 25.12.2016. 5. Learned Special Judge, Chamba has acquitted the respondent on two counts. Firstly, the non-association of independent witnesses has weighed with learned Special Judge to disbelieve the case of the prosecution and secondly, the benefit of the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mohan Lal vs. State of Punjab, 2018 (8) JT 53 , was given to the accused by holding that since SI Sat Pal (PW-14) was the complainant and the investigator himself, therefore, in view of Mohan Lal (supra), the trial stood vitiated because of the infraction of the constitutional guarantee of a fair investigation. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case carefully. 7. Mr. Kamal Kant, learned Deputy Advocate General for the appellant/State has, at the outset, laid challenge to the impugned judgment of acquittal on the ground that the view taken by the two Judges Bench in Mohan Lal (supra) has been held to be not good law by a Full Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mukesh Singh vs. State (Narcotics Branch of Delhi), 2020 (10) SCC 120 , therefore, the respondent could not be given the benefit of the fact that SI Sat Pal (PW-14) himself was the complainant and investigator also. In addition, it has been contended that without admitting the failure on part of the Investigating Officer to associate independent witnesses, the mere fact of non-association of independent witnesses cannot be a ground of acquittal. 8. We are in agreement with the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant-State. In addition, it has been contended that without admitting the failure on part of the Investigating Officer to associate independent witnesses, the mere fact of non-association of independent witnesses cannot be a ground of acquittal. 8. We are in agreement with the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant-State. The law laid down in Mohan Lal case (supra) has been held to be not good law in Mukesh Singh (supra), therefore, the mere fact that complainant and investigator was the same person will not vitiate the trial and cannot be a ground for acquittal alone. 9. The other ground on which learned Special Judge has acquitted the respondent is non-association of independent witnesses despite availability. Learned Special Judge has clearly erred in acquitting the respondent on this ground also. It is trite law that mere non-association of independent witnesses is not fatal to the prosecution under the Act. The association of independent witnesses may lend credence to the prosecution version, but its absence is not always fatal. The evaluation and appreciation of the statements of police witnesses as well as other material brought on record is necessary to arrive at a conclusion as the genuineness and authenticity thereof. 10. In Raveen Kumar vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2020) 12 Scale 138 , it has been held as under: “19. It would be gainsaid that lack of independent witnesses are not fatal to the prosecution case. However, such omissions cast an added duty on Courts to adopt a greater-degree of care while scrutinising the testimonies of the police officers, which if found reliable can form the basis of a successful conviction.” 11. From the perusal of impugned judgment it is revealed that no such exercise, as observed above, was undertaken by learned Special Judge save and except to scrutinize the evidence with respect to the possibility of availability of witnesses and their non-association. The approach adopted by learned Special Judge cannot be countenanced. 12. In light of the above discussion, the judgment dated 20.09.2018 passed by learned Special Judge-II, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. in case Re.N/NDPS/18/2017 is set-aside. The matter is remitted back to learned Special Judge, Chamba to decide it afresh in light of the observations made hereinabove. Since the case was registered in the year 2016, it will be expedient in the interest of justice in case learned Special Judge, Chamba disposes of the matter expeditiously. 13. The matter is remitted back to learned Special Judge, Chamba to decide it afresh in light of the observations made hereinabove. Since the case was registered in the year 2016, it will be expedient in the interest of justice in case learned Special Judge, Chamba disposes of the matter expeditiously. 13. The instant appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any.