NDPS conviction upheld on compliant search, corroborated recovery, and inconsistent customs statements supporting guilt.

Conviction under the NDPS Act was sustained because the heroin recovery was corroborated by prosecution witnesses and a panchnama prepared in the presence of independent witnesses. The search was held to comply with the statutory safeguard, as an offer was made, a Gazetted Officer was present, and the appellant consented to the search. The appellant's statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act were inconsistent, and the false description of the consignee together with the appellant's conduct was treated as corroborative evidence. On the totality of the material, the prosecution case was proved beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction for offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was sustainable on the basis of the recovery, the search conducted after compliance with the statutory safeguard, and the appellant's statements recorded under the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The recovery of heroin from the consignment was supported by the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and the panchnama prepared in the presence of independent witnesses. The search was preceded by an offer under the statutory safeguard and was conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer after the appellant consented. The appellant's statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 contained inconsistent explanations, and the surrounding circumstances, including the false description of the consignee and the appellant's conduct, were treated as corroborative of guilt. The evidence was found consistent and sufficient to establish the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt.

Conclusion: The conviction and sentence were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.

---