- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47177 CRL.A No. 526 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 526 OF 2023 (A) BETWEEN: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY EXCISE POLICE, HONSANAGARA RANGE, THIRTHAHALLI SUB DIVISION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU -560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B. LAKSHMAN, HCGP) AND: MAHESH S/O. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O. RAMAPPANASARA, HAROHITTALU VILLAGE, KEREHALLI HOBLI, HOSANAGARA TALUK - 577 418. …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(1) AND (3) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO a) GRANT LEAVE TO FILE AN APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER DATED 03.09.2022 PASSED IN SPL.(NDPS).C.NO.164/2020 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SHIVAMOGGA ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 20(a) OF N.D.P.S. ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47177 CRL.A No. 526 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the Principal District and Special Judge, Shivamogga in Special (NDPS) Case No.164/2020 dated 03.09.2022. 2. The brief facts leading to this appeal is that the Excise Inspector, Hosanagara Range, Thirthahalli Sub- Division has submitted the charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 20(a), 20(i), 25 and 8(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 3. It is alleged that on 11.10.2019 at about 10.00 A.M. the accused had illegally cultivated 4 ganja plants, weighing 5 kg 220 grams in the land bearing survey No. 28 of Ramappanasara, Harohittalu village in Hosanagara taluk in order to have wrongful gain without any lawful authority, the accused has committed the alleged offence. After filing the charge sheet, cognizance was taken against the accused and case was registered, in response accused - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47177 CRL.A No. 526 of 2023 appeared before the Court and released on bail. On hearing the charges, Trial Court has framed the charges for the offence punishable under Section 20(a) of NDPS Act and the same was read over and explained to the accused. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. The prosecution in order to establish its case, has examined 8 witnesses as PWs-1 to PW-8, 23 documents were marked as Ex.P-1 to P-23, two material objects were marked as MO Nos.1 and 2. On closer of prosecution side evidence, statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C was recorded. Accused has totally denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses. However, he has not chosen to lead any evidence on his behalf. 5. Trial Court has acquitted the accused. Being aggrieved by this acquittal order, State has preferred this appeal. 6. Heard the arguments and examined the materials placed before this Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47177 CRL.A No. 526 of 2023 7. It is the case of prosecution that on 11.10.2019 at about 10.00 a.m the accused has illegally cultivated 4 ganja plants, weighing 5 kgs 220 grams in the land bearing survey No.28 of Ramappanasara, Harohittalu village in Hosanagara taluk, thus the accused has committed the offence punishable under Section 20(a) of NDPS Act. 8. The Trial Court has clearly held that there is no cogent and convincing evidence placed by the prosecution and the prosecution has failed to place any documentary evidence to show that the backyard in question was in the possession and cultivation of the accused. The alleged seizure of ganja plants is not conformity with the law. Further, there is no materials to show that the I.O has complied the mandatory provisions of Section 42 and 50 of the Evidence Act. 9. Further, the Trial Court has observed that the entire evidence placed on record by the prosecution does not inspire the confidence of this Court and there is a - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47177 CRL.A No. 526 of 2023 dearth of cogent, convincing and corroborative materials placed on record by the prosecution. Accordingly, Trial Court has held that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. 10. On re-examination of the entire materials on record, I do not find any materials to admit this appeal. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:- ORDER The appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4