2025:HHC:43460 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 392 of 2024 Date of decision: 12.12.2025. State of Himachal Pradesh ...Petitioner. Versus Milap Chand …Respondent. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner. Ms. Sharmila Patial, Additional Advocate General. For the Respondent: Mr. Yashveer Singh Rathore, Advocate. __________________________________________________________ Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral) Learned Additional Advocate General submits that in present case, challan was presented against the respondent for having been found in possession of commercial quantity of Charas, i.e., 4.400 kgs. and accordingly, charge for commission of offence punishable under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), was framed. However, respondent has been convicted under Section 20 of NDPS Act, but with the punishment provided for small 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:43460 Cr. Appeal No. 392 of 2024 quantity for having been found in possession of only small quantity of charas. 2. In view of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Cr. A. No. 325/2023, titled as State of H.P. vs. Shaul Borov, decided on 20.12.2023 as affirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No. Diary No.50995/2024 (I.A. No.257015/2024), titled as State of H.P. vs. Shaul Borov, decided on 14.11.2024, for presentation of challan for commercial quantity, respondent has to be deemed to have been charged for commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C), but for awarding sentence of small quantity only, the respondent has to be considered to have been punished under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of NDPS Act and thus, respondent has been acquitted under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of NPDS Act, whereas present appeal has been filed for enhancement of sentence. 3. It has been further submitted by the learned Additional Advocate General that in present case, another appeal against acquittal of respondent under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act, bearing Criminal Appeal No. 353 of 2024, preferred by the State is pending adjudication. 4. In view of above facts and circumstances, present appeal is held not maintainable and accordingly disposed of. 3 2025:HHC:43460 Cr. Appeal No. 392 of 2024 5. Record, if any, in this appeal, be tagged with Cr. Appeal No. 353 of 2024. Copy of this order also be placed on record of Cr. Appeal No. 353 of 2024. 6. Appeal disposed of in aforesaid terms along with pending applications, if any. (Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge. (Romesh Verma), Judge. 12th December, 2025 (Susheel)