1 2025:CGHC:6692 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 189 of 2025 1 - Basudev Sande S/o Chaitu Sande Aged About 23 Years R/o Ward No. 05, Dhodharkasa, Thana- Sankara, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Anil Sidar S/o Niranjan Sidar Aged About 38 Years R/o Ward No. 05, Dhodharkasa, Thana- Sankara, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Sankara, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellants : Ms. Anjali Pradhan, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. GA (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 05/02/2025 Heard. 1. The instant criminal appeal under Section 415 (2) of the BNSS has been preferred against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17/01/2025 passed by the Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, C.G. in Special Criminal (NDPS Act) Case No.H-4/2019, whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 20(b) ii (B) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 and sentenced to ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.03.05 15:17:19 +0530 2 undergo R.I. for 05 years and to pay fine of Rs.30,000/-, each, and in default of payment of fine to undergo additional R.I. for 01 year. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 07.01.2019, Inspector Veena Yadav received information from an informer that two persons were coming from Pithora towards Basna in a red-black coloured Passion Pro motor cycle number CG 06 F 0964 carrying illegal narcotic substance ganja in a white coloured bag for sale. On the above information, she reached the spot along with the staff and witnesses and cordoned off the area. After some time, two persons were seen coming in a red-black coloured Passion Pro motor cycle number CG 06 F 0964, who were stopped by signaling with their hands. On enquiry, the motor cycle driver told his name to be Basudev Sande and the person sitting on the motor cycle holding a white coloured bag at the back told his name to be Anil Sidar. The accused were made aware of their legal rights and their vehicle was searched. On being searched the motorcycle bearing registration number CG 06 F 0964, no objectionable material was found. The white coloured bag kept with them was searched, in which 04 packets of illegal drug ganja, wrapped in brown coloured tape, were recovered. When the drugs recovered from the accused were weighed on a certified scale, it was found to be 04 kg 50 grams in total. The recovered drugs were sealed and seized. Thereafter, the appellants were arrested. 3. The appellants abjured their guilt during the trial and claimed to be tried. The prosecution on its behalf examined as many as 10 witnesses and exhibited 49 documents. The learned trial Court after evaluating 3 the facts & evidence convicted the accused as aforesaid. Hence this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the compliance of standing order 1/89 of the NDPS Act was not done because the I.O. Veena Yadav (PW-8) herself has admitted that there was no compliance of standing order. She would next contend that the appellants have been falsely implicated as there is no reliable evidence to convict the appellants for the alleged offence. She would lastly contend that in such circumstances the appellants may be acquitted of the charges leveled against them and the appeal may be allowed. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court is well merited which do not call for any interference by this Court. Consequently, the appeal has no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the evidence. 7. As per the evidence of Veena Yadav (PW 08), for verification of information given by the informer, the accompanying staff, Sub Inspector Santosh Komra, Constable No. 409 Yuchand Banshe, Constable No. 693 Roshan Sen along with independent witnesses present in Government Vehicle No. 03 6408, carrying investigation kit, cordoned off the main NH 53 Binjrabhata road. 8. Pankaj Bagh (PW 07) stated that on 07.01.2019 itself at 06.20 minutes, Inspector Veena Yadav and accompanying staff witness in government 4 vehicle with investigation kit went to National Highway 53 for verification and raid action. 9. After receiving informer information by Police Station in-charge Veena Yadav (P.S. 08), she recorded it in the daily diary and through constable Pankaj Bagh (P.W. 07) summoned two independent witnesses Krishna Yadav (P.W. 09) and Gopal Patre (P.W. 01) and informed them about the informer’s information and in front of them prepared informer information panchnama Ex. P. 02; document regarding not receiving search warrant Ex. P. 03; and document regarding permission to search without warrant Ex. P. 04 and the information in this regard was sent to her senior officer in the SDOP office. Which has been confirmed by Motilal Paikara who was sent by giving him work certificate (Karya Pramanpatra) to informer information panchnama Ex.P. 02, document regarding not receiving search warrant Ex.P. 03 and document Ex.P. 04 regarding permission to conduct search without warrant to his senior officer, who then went to SDOP Pithora and submitted informer information panchnama Ex.P. 02, document regarding not receiving search warrant Ex.P. 03 and document regarding permission to conduct search without warrant to the reader of SDOP Niraakar Nayak (PW-03) and received his receiving which has been supported by the statement of Nirakar Nayak (PW-3). As such in this matter the inspector has followed the statutory provisions of Section 42 (1) & (2) of the NDPS Act. 10. Perusal of the documents and evidence would show that the samples and the report of FSL shows that the seized article is Ganja. On perusal of the record I have found that the investigation officer has followed the 5 mandatory provisions of Section 42 of the NDPS Act and complied the provisions of Section 52 A of the NDPS Act and also complied the notification of the Central Government 01/89 and the inventory has been prepared. Thereafter, 09 photographs of the contraband has been taken and it is proved that the samples are kept intact and report of the FSL shows that the seized contraband is Ganja. 11. From over all discussion of the evidence and considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case, the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant under Section 20(b) ii (B) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. 12. So far as the sentence part is concerned, the quantity of seized contraband is 04 K.G. & 50 Gms., however, the learned trial Court has sentenced them 05 years R.I. and to pay fine of Rs.30,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for one year. Therefore, looking to the quantity of contraband so seized and further considering the fact that the appellants having already remained in jail for about 01 month & 12 days i.e. 08/01/2019 to 20/02/2019 and from 03/10/2023 to 05/10/2023, and has thus undergone sentence of about one month and fourteen days. The above sentence already suffered by the appellant is considered adequate for the offence under Section 20(b) ii (B) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. 13. Therefore, taking into consideration totality of circumstances, this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be best met, if the substantive sentence of imprisonment of the appellants is reduced to that already undergone by them. 14. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and conviction of the 6 appellants under Section 20(b) ii (B) of N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 is maintained and their substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to that already undergone by them. However, remaining part of sentence, i.e. payment of fine of Rs. 30,000/- shall remain intact. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu