Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973–Sec. 386(b) [Corresponding Sec. 427(b) of BNSS, 2023]–Direction of re-trial by the High Court with the observations that the best evidence of search and seizure operation was not converted into admissible evidence, the chemical examiner was not produced as a witness and the prosecutor did not produce the remnant samples and the representative samples–Re-trial was not required only to explain the video in the facts and circumstances of case because the certificate u/s. 65B of the Evidence Act was given to make the CD admissible in evidence and electronic record was duly exhibited–The video was perheps to corroborate the oral testimony because the search and seizure were sought to be proved by the oral evidence–Further, as per provisions of Sec. 293 Cr.P.C., evidence of chemical examiner is admissible in evidence, even if he is not produced as a witness–Mere non-production of the seized contraband during trial may not be fatal if there is reliable evidence in respect of its seizure, drawing of samples therefrom and FSL report relating to the sample drawn from the seized material–It was not a ground to direct for the re-trial when the Appellate Court has power to take additional evidence u/s. 391, Cr.P.C.–Impugned judgment passed by the High Court is liable to be set aside–Appeals are restored on the record of the High Court for a fresh decision.
