Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

10. The learned trial Court acquitted the Respondents by the impugned judgment dated 6th July 2013. The trial Court noted that there were variations in the test reports of the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) of the testing of the samples. In the first instance, when the samples were tested on 23rd June 2009, the samples recovered from A-1, A-2 and A-3, namely, the parcels S-1, S-2 and S-3 were found to contain four substances, i.e., caffeine, monoacetylmorphine (MAM), acetylcodeine and diacetylmorphine (DAM). The percentages of DAM in the three samples were found to be 76.2%, 79.5% and 86% respectively.

12. On the issue as to why the second set of samples recovered from A-2 and A-3, CS-2 and CS-3 were found to contain only MAM and DAM and not caffeine and acetylcodeine, PW-10 was recalled by the prosecution for further examination. In her cross-examination upon being recalled, PW-10 admitted that caffeine was a stable substance and its percentage would remain the same in a sample over a passage of time. She explained that the fact that acetylcodeine was found in very small traces in CS-2 and CS-3 when compared to the first set of samples, i.e., S-2 and S-3 could be explained by the presence of dilutents. There was a possibility that the sample drawn for the second time had been diluted.