1 2026:CGHC:9152 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 240 of 2017 Smt. Bitti Chakrawarty W/o Ramu Chakrawarty, Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Bhattha Mohalla, Katni, Police Station City Kotwali, District Katni, Madhya Praesh., Madhya Pradesh ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station G.R.P. Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Shubham Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Judgment on Board 20/02/2026 1. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C., 1973 by the appellants against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.01.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act, 1985), Bilaspur (C.G.), in Special 2 Sessions Case No. 391/2015, whereby the appellant has 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 3 years with fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 1 month 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 14.10.2015 at 18:00 hrs., Station House Officer, Government Railway Police, Bilaspur (CG), S.L. Navratna received information from the gymnasium informer that “a lady aged approximately between 30 to 38 years was found fair complexion, wearing two white printed sarees and a white blouse, wearing six green bangles in each hand and pink slippers on her feet, carrying a black purple bag, and a trolley bag containing the psychoactive herb ganja, sitting at the Raipur end of platform no. 6 of Bilaspur Railway Station for illegal sale and waiting to leave by a train.” Upon receiving the above information, Police Station Incharge S.L. Navratna registered the case No. 62/14.10.2015 and sent Constable No. 147 Bhanwar Singh Armo to bring two independent witnesses. Constable Bhanwar Singh Armo served notices to witness Satyabhan Dwivedi and witness Sheru Khan under Section 160 of the CrPC and brought them to the GRP Police Station at 18:45. Police Station Incharge S.L. Navratna The above action was recorded in the diary Sanha No. 65/14.10.2015 and after preparing the informer information panch- nama and the search without warrant panchnama in the presence 3 of the above witnesses, its entry was recorded in the diary Sanha No. 66/14.10.2015 and constable number 344 Agrasen Ratre was sent to inform the senior officer along with the above informer in- formation panchnama and the search without warrant panch- nama. Thereafter at 19:20, the station in-charge S.L. Navratna along with his other accompanying staff and witnesses Satyabhan and Sheru Khan left for the incident site, Bilaspur Railway Station. The bag which you are holding in your hand, which contains the narcotic substance ganja, which is kept for sale illegally, if she wants to go to a magistrate or a senior gazetted officer and get it searched by him, give her consent in this regard. The accused gave her consent that she wants her bag to be searched by In- spector S.L. Navratna. Thereafter at 20:15 the accused along with other staff members were searched and at 20.25 the accused got the witnesses Satyabhan Dwivedi and Sheru Khan searched. Dur- ing their search no psychoactive plant or narcotic substance ganja was found with them. Subsequently, at 8:33 PM, the accused was searched and found to be in possession of a purple, four-chain trolley bag containing 12 packets of marijuana wrapped in khaki- colored cellophane tape, and a travel ticket, number H02872621, dated 14/10/2015, from Bilaspur to Katni, for a fare of 60 per per ₹ - son. The marijuana and ticket were recovered from the accused. The substance was then identified by smell, burning, and experi- ence, and it was determined to be marijuana, a strongly odorous plant substance. Subsequently, at 8:55 PM, a comprehensive 4 panchnama was prepared by combining the 12 recovered packets of marijuana. At 8:05 PM, a balance panchnama was prepared for weighing the marijuana. The weights were 5 kilograms, 2 kilo- grams, 1 kilogram, and 50 grams. 5 kg, 2 kg, and 1 kg weights were used for weighing, and 50 gram weights were used for the sample. At 8:15 PM, the recovered marijuana was weighed in front of witnesses at the Raipur end of Bilaspur Railway Station Platform No. 6. The weight was found to be 12 kg. Samples of 50 grams each were taken from the packets, sealed on the spot, and marked A1 and A2. After the samples were taken, the remaining marijuana was also sealed. Subsequently, at 8:25 PM, a purple trolley bag, the marijuana recovered as described above, and the travel ticket were seized from the accused in front of witnesses at the Raipur end of Bilaspur Railway Station Platform No. 6. A panchnama and a site map of the sealed sample were prepared at the scene in front of the accused. A First Information Report was filed, and witness statements were recorded. The seized mar- ijuana, as described above, was handed over by the Station House Officer (GRP), Bilaspur, to Head Constable Roopkishore Sen, Goods Munshi, GRP, Bilaspur, who received it at 8:20 PM on 14/10/2015. The consignment was recorded in the consignment register. Following the above proceedings, the accused was ar- rested at 8:20 PM. During the further investigation proceedings, the Station House Officer (SHO) of GRP Bilaspur, vide letter dated 14.10.2015, sent written information of the said action along with a 5 copy of the First Information Report (FIR), seizure memo and ar- rest panchnama to the Superintendent of Police, Railway, Raipur and also sent a written information along with a copy of the same documents to the Special Judge, NDPS Court, Bilaspur on 14.10.2015. On 19.10.2015, the Superintendent of Police, Rail- way, Raipur, sent the sealed sample as above for chemical testing through Constable Constable 232 Sudhakar Rao to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur, along with the First Information Re- port (FIR), seizure memo and sample The sealing documents were also sent. On 19.10.2015, Constable No. 232 Sudhakar Rao received the above-mentioned sealed sample packets from the goods clerk to take them to FSL Raipur for chemical testing and deposited them in the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur on 19.10.2015. The test report of the said sample was sent from the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur on 28.10.2015 to the Superintendent of Police, Railway District, Raipur, in which the sealed packets were found to contain ganja. The said report was sent by the Superintendent of Police, Railway, Raipur to the Sta- tion House Officer, GRP, Bilaspur. 3. The learned Special Judge (NDPS) Durg (C.G.), after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record vide judgment dated 20.01.2017, convicted the appellant for the offence punish- able under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. and sentenced them as mentioned in opening paragraph of this order. 6 4. The appellant was in jail from 14.10.2015 to 14.02.2017 (01 year 4 months). 5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appel- lants are innocent person and have 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 has already undergone 1 year and 4 months of the sentence awarded by the trial Court. There is also no previous criminal an- tecedents against the appellant. Therefore, the jail sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 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. 7 9. From perusal of the records it transpires that on 14.10.2015 at about 18:00 hrs, the Station House Officer, GRP Bilaspur, re- ceived confidential information that a woman aged about 30–38 years was sitting at Platform No. 6 (Raipur end) of Bilaspur Rail- way Station carrying a trolley bag containing ganja for illegal sale. The information was recorded in the station diary, and two inde- pendent witnesses were summoned. The police party reached the spot and informed the accused of her right to be searched before a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer. She consented to be searched by the SHO. On search, a purple trolley bag containing 12 packets of ganja and a railway ticket were recovered from her possession. The total contraband weighed 12 kilograms. Two samples of 50 grams each were drawn and sealed on the spot, and the remain- ing ganja was also sealed. A seizure memo and panchnama were prepared at the scene, and the accused was arrested. The seized samples were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur. The FSL report confirmed that the seized substance was ganja. After following the due processes, chargesheet was submitted be- fore the learned Special Judge who convicted the appellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985. Considering the mate- rial available on record and the evidence adduced by the prosecu- tion, I am of the view that the Trial Court did not commit any ille- gality or infirmity in the findings recorded by Trial Court as regards conviction of the appellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. 8 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 possessed 12 kg of ganja in violation of the provisions of the NDPS Act. 11. As regards the sentence awarded to the appellant. Considering the fact that the appellant is facing criminal trial since 2015, consid- ering the age of the appellant at present and further considering the quantity of contraband seized from the possession of appellant i.e. 12 kg contraband(ganja), which is intermediate quantity and there is no previous criminal antecedents and further the appellant has remained in jail for 1 year and 4 months, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that in the interest of justice, the sentence im- posed upon the appellant is reduced to the period already under- gone by the appellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B). However, fine im- posed by trial Court is maintained. 12. With the aforesaid observations, the criminal appeal is allowed in part. The appellant is held guilty of committing offence under Sec- tion 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act and is convicted for the said offence. However, the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him. The appellant is reported to be on bail. Surety and per- 9 sonal bond earlier furnished at the time of suspension of sentence shall remain operative for a period of six months in view of the pro- visions of Section 437-A Cr.P.C. 13. Let a copy of this order and the original records be transmitted to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma ) Judge Madhurima