“(3) The High Court, in a rather detailed judgment, stated that the vital question was whether necessary safeguards have been observed relating to the safe custody of articles alleged to have been seized and thus questioned the validity of seizure. Admittedly, the seizure was made on 31st January, 1993 and the articles seized were produced before the learned SDJM on 15.4.1993. The seizure lists related to collected samples of brown sugar/heroin, the place of seizure mentioned to be power house road, park area, Rourkela and the seizure lists were prepared on 31st January, 1993atabout7.15 p.m. and 7.30 p.m. It has been argued before the High Court that in the seizure lists, there is a reference to the plantsite police station case no. 43 of 1993 which, in the normal course of events, should not have been recorded and as such seizure lists became suspect. The High Court, however, did not find it convenient to deal with the matter oh the ground that it may not be appropriate to deal with the said plea for the first time in appeal. The High Court, however, placed strong reliance on the defence submission of non-production of the malkhana register. On this ground, the High Court recorded that the malkhana register has not been tendered in evidence and acceptance of the oral statement of PW5 that the articles were in the police malkhana of plant-site police station and nothing else is available on record would not
