1 2025:CGHC:22589 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1567 of 2024 1 - Bahadur Rajwade S/o. Shri Babulal Rajwade Aged About 50 Years Caste - Rajwar, R/o. Village - Vishunpur Uparwara, Thana - Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.). ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Police Station - Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.). ... Respondent For Appellant : Dr. Rajesh Pandey, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Mahesh Pandey, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Baharani, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 09 /0 6 /202 5 1. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.08.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, (N.D.P.S. Act) Surajpur, district – Surajpur (C.G.), in Special Criminal Case No. 14/2023 whereby the learned Special Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant as under : Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.06.09 18:04:50 +0530 2 Conviction Sentence U/s 20(A) of N.D.P.S. Act R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount additional R.I. for 6 months. 2. Brief facts of the case are that on 11.06.2023, ASI of police Station Surajpur Sanjay Singh (PW-16) received secret information from informant to the effect that the resident of village Bishunpur Uparpara, Bahadur Rajwade, the appellant has cultivated the illegal intoxicating substance like Ganja of 100-200 plants beside the filed of his house near bamboo and lime trees. The plant of ganja has grown up to 5 to 6 feet tall. On such information, the police conducted the raid and recovered 227 pieces of Ganja plant from the field of the appellant. Consequently, the appellant was arrested and after completion of the investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellant. 3. So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 16 witnesses and exhibited 76 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. 4. After hearing the parties, vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.08.2024, learned Special Judge has convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the seizure witness as well as the independent witness, have not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits 3 that Patwari (PW-6) has deposed in para 6 of his statement that the land in which intoxicating substance was cultivated, is of joint ownership of 5 persons and he did not find out that who was in possession of the said land, even I.O. also did not attempt to do so, as such the case under Section 20(A) of NDPS Act is not made out against the appellant. Alternatively, he submits that the incident is said to have taken place on 11.06.2023, and since then the appellant is in jail i.e. about 2 years. The appellant is aged about 52 years and he is still serving the jail sentence; 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 and he may be released from jail. 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting the impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record including the impugned judgment. 8. Having gone through the material on record and the evidence of the witnesses Laxmi Narayan Mirre (PW-3), Yogendra Bhagat (PW-5), Uday Singh (PW-9), Surendra Singh (PW-10), Arun Bada (PW-11), Deepak Khalkho (PW- 13), Shivmurat Kindo (PW-14), Dinesh Rajwade (PW-15) and Sanjay Singh (PW-16), establishes the involvement of the accused/appellant in the crime in question. Thus, considering the oral and documentary evidence on record the seizure of Ganja plants from the possession of the accused/appellant which was subsequently found to be Ganja as per FSL report vide Ex. P-76. This Court does not see any illegality in the findings recorded by the trial Court as regards conviction of the appellant under Section 20(A) 4 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. 9. In the instant case, the appellant has been arrested on 11.06.2023 since then he is in custody i.e. about 2 years, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the appellant has already served the jail sentence of about 2 years and at present the appellant is aged about 52 years, 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. 10. In the result the appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining the conviction of the appellant under Section 20(A) of NDPS Act, his jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him i.e. about 2 years instead of R.I. for 05 years. However, the fine imposed upon the appellant by the Trial Court shall remain intact. 11. The appellant is reported to be in jail. He be released forthwith if not required in any other case. 12. 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