NDPS conviction upheld despite sample-delay and custody objections; default sentence reduced on leniency grounds.

Conviction under the NDPS Act was sustained where interception and seizure in a restricted customs area, supported by customs officers and an independent witness, showed recovery of packets concealed in sandals, spot sampling, sealing, and production before the Magistrate. The Court held that alleged delay in forwarding samples to the chemical examiner did not vitiate the case because safe custody was proved and analysis confirmed ketamine. It further found substantial compliance with Section 52A and the standing instructions, with conscious possession and seizure established. The substantive imprisonment and fine were maintained, but the default sentence for non-payment of fine was reduced to one month on sentencing leniency grounds.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the conviction under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act was liable to be interfered with on the grounds of alleged non-compliance with procedural safeguards, delay in sending samples, and alleged defects in the chain of custody. (ii) Whether the default sentence imposed on the appellant required reduction in the facts of the case.

Issue (i): Whether the conviction under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act was liable to be interfered with on the grounds of alleged non-compliance with procedural safeguards, delay in sending samples, and alleged defects in the chain of custody.

Analysis: The seizure was found to have taken place in a restricted customs area after the appellant had crossed the immigration point. The evidence of the customs officers and the independent witness established interception, search, seizure of packets concealed in the sandals, preparation of mahazar, sampling at the spot, sealing, and production before the remanding Magistrate. The Court held that the alleged delay in forwarding the samples to the chemical examiner, by itself, did not discredit the prosecution when the samples were shown to have remained in safe custody and the chemical analysis confirmed Ketamine, a psychotropic substance. The Court also held that the requirements relating to Section 52A and the standing instructions were substantially complied with on the facts, and that conscious possession and seizure stood proved.

Conclusion: The challenge to the conviction failed and the findings of guilt were upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the default sentence imposed on the appellant required reduction in the facts of the case.

Analysis: The Court took note of the appellant's poor background and the circumstance that he was a carrier, and applied sentencing leniency to the default clause while leaving the substantive imprisonment and fine intact.

Conclusion: The default sentence was reduced to one month.

Final Conclusion: The conviction and substantive sentence were maintained, but the sentence in default of payment of fine was modified, resulting in only partial relief to the appellant.

---