NDPS conviction unsustainable where missing independent witness and flawed investigation created serious doubt, leading to acquittal.

A conviction under the NDPS Act was held unsustainable where the prosecution failed to examine the independent witness present at the search and seizure, offered no satisfactory reason for withholding that witness, and relied on an investigation conducted by the same police officer who had received the information. The Court also noted unexplained discrepancies in the search record, including panchanamas carrying the FIR number despite being prepared before FIR registration. These defects created serious doubt about the prosecution version, undermined the fairness and reliability of the investigation, and justified granting the accused the benefit of doubt and acquittal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 could be sustained in view of the unexplained non-examination of the independent witness, the informant-investigator overlap, and the unexplained discrepancies in the search and seizure record.

Analysis: The prosecution failed to examine the independent witness who was present at the spot and in whose presence the search and seizure was conducted, and no satisfactory basis was shown for withholding that witness. The same police officer who received the information also carried out the investigation, which offended the requirement of a fair investigation. The panchanamas also contained the FIR number despite being drawn up before registration of the FIR, and the prosecution offered no explanation for this inconsistency. These deficiencies created serious doubt about the prosecution version and undermined the fairness and reliability of the investigation.

Conclusion: The conviction could not be sustained and the appellant was entitled to acquittal by giving the benefit of doubt.

---