1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-State and
the learned counsel for the respondents-accused.
2. Though we find some substance in the submission of the
learned counsel for the appellant that the Court below may
not be justified in observing that there was non-compliance
of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985, but having regard to other
observations of the Trial Court such as there being
discrepancies in the statement of the witnesses; independent
witnesses were not joined for evidencing the recovery; and
there were discrepancies in the testimony of the witnesses
regarding handing over of the seal with which the contraband
articles (poppy husk) were sealed, we are of the view that
the finding that prosecution failed to prove the guilt
beyond reasonable doubt does not warrant interference.
Therefore, the order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court,
which has been affirmed by the High Court, calls for no
Reason: interference.