1 2025:CGHC:61200 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1973 of 2025 1 - Prem Thakur S/o Shri Vijay Thakur Aged About 21 Years R/o Green Chowk, Station Road, Under The Over Bridge, Durg, District - Durg Chhattisgarh 2 - Sonu Das Manikpuri S/o Chatur Das Manikpuri Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Behind Tularam School Mohan Nagar Durg, Thana - Mohan Nagar Durg, District - Durg Chhattisgarh 3 - Rajkumar @ Matka S/o Shri Ramsingh Deshlahre Aged About 22 Years R/o Sikolabhatha Durg, Thana - Mohan Nagar Durg, District - Durg Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate Rajnandgaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellants : Mr. Rajendra Sahu on behalf of Mr. Khilendra Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. G.A. 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Judgment on Board 16/12/2025 1. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 415 (2) of BNSS, 2023 by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.08.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.), in Special Sessions Case (NDPS) No. 01/2020, whereby the appel- lants have been convicted and sentenced as follows:- Convicted Sentenced to U/s 20(b)(ii)(B) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 1 month. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 17.02.2025 at about 1:30 pm Sub-Inspector Baliram Bisan has received secrete information from the informant at the time of Patrolling with the averment that the contraband article Ganja is kept by the appellants for the pur- pose of selling near Village- Chhote Birejhar so on the basis of the information police has prepared the information panchnama and call the independent witnesses by giving the notice and prepared the panchnama in presence of the witnesses and constituted the team for search. 3. The learned Special Judge (NDPS) District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.), after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on 3 record vide judgment dated 26.08.2025, convicted the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. and sentenced them as mentioned in opening paragraph of this order. 4. The appellants have remained in jail for 2 months and 4 days dur- ing trial and from the date of judgment, i.e. 26.08.2025 and cur- rently are on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the appel- lants are innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case and the mandatory provisions have not been fol- lowed by the prosecution. The judgment of the Trial Court is bad in law as well as on facts. The learned Trial Court ought not to have convicted and sentenced the appellants and ought to have given the benefit of doubt since the evidence submitted by the prosecution is very shaky and unbelievable. The Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence and documents available on record. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and confine his arguments to the sentence part thereof only. Further, he submits that the appellant s at present is aged about 21, 30 and 22 years respectively and have already undergone around 3 months awarded by the trial Court. There is also no previous criminal antecedents against the appellants. Therefore, the jail sentence awarded to the appellants may be reduced to the period already undergone by them. 4 7. Learned Panel Laywer appearing for the respondent/State, sub- mits that the Trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants, in which no interference is called for. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and also went through the records with utmost circumspection. 9. From perusal of the records, it transpires that on 17.02.2025 at about 1:30 pm Sub-Inspector Baliram Bisan has received secrete information from the informant at the time of Patrolling with the averment that the contraband article Ganja is kept by the appel- lants for the purpose of selling near Village- Chhote Birejhar so on the basis of the information police has prepared the information panchnama and call the independent witnesses by giving the no- tice and prepared the panchnama in presence of the witnesses and constituted the team for search. After following the due pro- cesses, chargesheet was submitted before the learned Special Judge who convicted the appellants under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo RI for 1 year to appellants and fine of Rs. 10,000/- to each appellant. Considering the material available on record and the evidence adduced by the prosecution, I am of the view that the Trial Court did not commit any illegality or infirmity in the findings recorded by Trial Court as regards conviction of the appellants under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. 5 10. Therefore, the essence of the above discussion is that the Investi- gating Officer in this case appears to have followed all the manda- tory and directive provisions of the NDPS Act. There is no con- crete reason to disbelieve the evidence of the Investigating Officer and other witnesses and the action taken by them. The accused did not produce any valid license or document in relation to the narcotic substance recovered from his possession. Therefore, it is proved that the appellant no. 1 possessed 1.502 kg, appellant no. 2 possessed 1.215 kg and appellant no. 3 possessed 1.152 kg of ganja in violation of the provisions of the NDPS Act. 11. As regards the quantum of sentence, considering total quantity of contraband (cannabis) seized from the appellants, i.e. 3.855 kg only, period of sentence imposed by the trial Court upon the ap- pellants, further the fact that appellant has already served about 3 months of jail sentence, they are not having any previous an- tecedents in similar nature, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in sending appellants to jail at this point of time for undergoing period of sentence and ends of justice would be met if the sentence awarded to the appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them. 12. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. Conviction of the ap- pellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act is hereby affirmed. Sentence imposed upon the appellants under aforementioned section is hereby modified and reduced to the period already un- 6 dergone by them. However, the fine imposed by the trial court shall remain intact. 13. The appellants are reported to be on bail, hence, their bail bonds stand cancelled and surety, if any, stands discharged. 14. The Trial Court record (TCR) along with a copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial court concerned for compli- ance and necessary action. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma ) Judge Madhurima