2025:HHC:37736 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr. A. No. 203/2023 Decided on: 10.11.2025 State of Himachal Pradesh …..Appellant Versus Bhupender Singh ….Respondent ______________________________________________________________ Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. J. S. Guleria, Deputy Advocate General. For the Respondent: Ms. Urwashi Rajta, Advocate, vice Mr. Vinod K. Gupta, Advocate. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (oral) Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that in the present matter, challan was presented in the Court against the respondent for having been found in possession of commercial quantity of charas i.e. 2.080 kgs and accordingly charge against the respondent was framed under Section 20 (b)(ii)C) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short, “the Act”). However, the respondent has been convicted under Section 20 (ii)(A) of the Act and therefore, the 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 respondent has to be deemed to have been acquitted under Section 20 (b)(ii)(C) of the Act. 2 In the aforesaid facts, learned Deputy Advocate General, submits that 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, the State intends to file to an appeal against the acquittal of the respondent under Section 20 (b)(ii)(C) of the Act and, therefore, the instant appeal be permitted to be withdrawn with a direction to the Registry to return the certified copy of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence to the State after replacing the same with photocopy thereof in record so as to enable the State to file certified copy of the judgment and order along with proposed appeal against the respondent. 3 Prayer is accepted and accordingly, the appeal is permitted to be withdrawn with a direction to the Registry to supply the certified copy of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence to the State within four days. 4 Needless to say, prayer for condonation of delay has to be considered by the Court, competent to hear the appeal, 3 proposed to be filed, in light of Sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act in accordance with law. 5 Bail bond, if any, furnished by or on behalf of the respondent in this appeal shall stand discharged. 6 The appeal stands disposed of, as withdrawn, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge (Romesh Verma) 10.11.2025 Judge (pankaj)