1 2025:CGHC:12855 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 75 of 20 08 • Chandrika alias Lala Verma S/o Vardani alias Samay Lal aged about 35 years, R/o Ward No. 4, Purani Basti, Pendra, P.S. Pendra, District – Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus • State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Police Station – Pendra, District – Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Yegendra Chaturvedi, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 18 /0 3 /202 5 1. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 14.02.2025, the appellant is present in person before this Court. His presence be marked. 2. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.09.2007 passed by the learned Special Judge, (N.D.P.S. Act) and Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.), in Special Case No. 13/2007 whereby the learned Special Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant as under : Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.03.20 10:35:51 +0530 2 Conviction Sentence U/s 20(b)(ii) (B) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount additional R.I. for 3 months. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 10.05.2007 the police of Police Station Pendra received secret information through telephone that the appellant was selling Ganja from his house ward No. 4 Purani Bast, Pendra. On the basis of the information Investigating Officer R.L. Bada (PW-5) recorded the information vide Ex.P-22 and thereafter prepared search panchnama vide Exs. P-26 & 27. Witnesses were summoned and thereafter police party proceeded to the spot. The accused/appellant was served with a notice under Section 50 of NDPS Act. After obtaining consent from the appellant, the investigating officer searched the house of the appellant and seized 6.100 kg of Ganja from the corner of a wall. Samples were separated from the seized cannabis and after due procedure, the appellant was arrested and FIR was registered. After completion of investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellant. 4. So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 5 witnesses and 36 documents. The statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case. 5. After hearing the parties, vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.09.2007, learned Special Judge has convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned in para-2 of this 3 judgment. Hence, the present appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not pressing the appeal so far as it relates to the conviction part of the judgment and would confine his argument to the sentence part thereof only. According to him, the incident is said to have taken place in the year 2007, and thereby more than 17 years have rolled by since then. The appellant is aged about 52 years and he has already remained in jail for about 1 year, 2 months and 20 days, and no useful purpose would be served in again sending him to jail, therefore, in the interest of justice, it would be appropriate if the sentence imposed upon him may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record including the impugned judgment. 9. Having gone through the material on record and the evidence of the witnesses Gopal Prasad Rajwade (PW-1), Dhansu Say (PW-2), Ashok Kumar Dhruv (PW-3), Gopal Tamrakar (PW-4) and R.L. Bada (PW-5), establish the involvement of the accused/appellant in the crime in question beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, considering the oral and documentary evidence on record the seizure of Contraband Ganja from the possession of the accused/appellant which was subsequently found to be Ganja as per FSL report vide Ex. P-36. This Court does not see any illegality in the findings recorded by the trial Court as regards conviction of the appellant under Section 20(b) (ii)(B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 4 10.In the instant case, the appellant has already remained in jail for about 1 year, 2 months and 20 days, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the offence was committed in the year 2007 i.e. about more than 17 years ago and at present the appellant is aged about 52 years and he has no criminal antecedent, this court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served if he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him while keeping the fine amount with default stipulation as imposed by the Trial Court intact. 11. In the result the appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining the conviction of the appellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act, his jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him i.e. 1 year, 2 months and 20 days instead of R.I. for 02 years. However, the fine imposed upon the appellant by the Trial Court shall remain intact. 12. The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds shall continue for a further period of 6 months as per requirement of Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C. 13. Record of the trial Court along with copy of this judgment be sent forthwith for compliance and necessary action, if any. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE H.L. Sahu