Inadmissible affidavits broke the link evidence, so the chemical report could not sustain the Opium Act conviction.

Affidavits tendered to complete link evidence under Section 297(2) CrPC were held inadmissible because the verification stated only knowledge and belief without separately disclosing facts within the deponent's knowledge and the grounds for belief. As a result, the prosecution failed to prove that the sample sent for chemical examination was the same sample recovered from the accused. Without reliable link evidence, the chemical examiner's report could not sustain the conviction under the Opium Act, and the accused was given the benefit of doubt and acquitted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the affidavits tendered to complete the link evidence were admissible under Section 297(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and whether, in their absence, the conviction under the Opium Act could be sustained.

Analysis: The affidavits relied upon by the prosecution were verified only on the basis of knowledge and belief and did not conform to the requirement that affidavits must separately state facts within the deponent's knowledge and facts believed to be true with the grounds of such belief. The verification was held to be defective, rendering the affidavits inadmissible in evidence. Without those affidavits, the prosecution failed to establish the necessary link evidence showing that the sample sent for chemical examination was the same sample recovered from the accused. In the absence of such proof, the conviction could not rest on the chemical examiner's report.

Conclusion: The affidavits were inadmissible, the link evidence was not proved, and the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt; the conviction and sentence were set aside and the petitioner was acquitted.

---