( 2025:HHC:37910 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No.592 of 2024 Date of Decision: 12.11.2025. State of H.P. ....Appellant Versus Manoj Kumar ....Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant : Mr. J. S. Guleria, Deputy Advocate General. For the Respondent : Mr. Vijender Katoch, Advocate. Vivek Singh Thakur,Judge (oral) Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that the present appeal has been preferred against the respondent for enhancement of the sentence imposed upon him vide judgment/order of conviction dated 31.08.2023, passed by the Special Judge, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. in RBT ST No. 127-P/VII/2023/2022, with submissions that the prosecution had presented a challan against the respondent for having been found in possession of a commercial quantity of 1 kg 70 grams of Charas/Cannabis, and on the basis of the said challan, charges were framed against the respondent under Sections 20 and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, “NDPS Act”). He further submits that, in view of the aforesaid facts, the charge against the respondent has to be deemed to have been framed under ____________ ( 2025:HHC:37910 ) Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. It has been submitted that, however, the respondent has been convicted for possessing a small quantity of Charas/Cannabis and, therefore, he has to be treated to have been convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act. 2. Learned Deputy Advocate General further submits that, in view of the judgment dated 20.12.2023 passed by a learned Single Judge of this High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 325 of 2023, titled State of H.P. vs. Shaul Borov, and affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 20.12.2023, passed in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No. 50995 of 2024, the State, in the present matter, has also preferred Criminal Appeal No. 428 of 2024, against the acquittal of the respondent under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. 3. In view of the aforesaid decisions (supra), the present appeal is not maintainable, and accordingly, the learned Deputy Advocate General prays for permission to withdraw it. 4. Considering the submissions made, the prayer of the learned Deputy Advocate General is accepted, and the appeal is permitted to be withdrawn, with the observation that the record, if any, tagged with this appeal, be made available/tagged with Criminal Appeal No. 428 of 2024. The bail bonds, if any, furnished by the respondent stand discharged. ____________ ( 2025:HHC:37910 ) The present appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Vivek Singh Thakur) (Judge) (Romesh Verma) (Judge) 12th November, 2025 (Shamsh Tabrez) ____________