1 2026:CGHC:5805 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 17 of 2017 Jodhram Rathore S/o Loknath Rathore, Aged About 42 Years R/o Ward No. 20, Kera Road, Janjgir, District- Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Appellant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Janjgir, District- Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Advocate (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR VERMA) Order on Board 02/02/2026 1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 23.12.2016 passed in Special Criminal Case No. 15 of 2014 by the learned Special Judge, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) wherein, the Appellant has been convicted under Section 20 (b) of NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- in default of payment of fine amount additional RI for 3 months. 2 2. According to the case of prosecution, on 21.09.2014, the police of police station: Janjgir, received secret information that the appellant is carrying contraband Ganja, upon such information, the police went to the place of incident at 08:00 pm, at Bazar Para in front of Kamal Sweets, Janjgir, District: Janjgir-Champa, where they caught the appellant with the contraband article ‘Ganja’ and seized total 1 kg 290 grams of Ganja from the possession of the appellant. The articles were seized and the appellant was arrested. After completing the investigation, showing compliance of all mandatory provisions of the Act, charge-sheet was filed. To robe the Appellant in the crime-in-question prosecution examined as many as total 10 witnesses. In the statement of Appellant recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C, Appellant pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter, however no defence witness was examined by the Appellant. After completion of trial, Trial Court convicted and sentenced the Appellant as mentioned in Para 01 of this judgment. Hence this appeal. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that he does not want to challenge the conviction part of the applicant and confines his argument to the sentence part only, which according to him is on higher side. He further submits that during trial the appellant has remained in jail from 22.09.2014 to 14.10.2014 and after the judgment of the Trial Court he has remained in jail from 23.12.2016 to 06.01.2017, he is facing the lis since September 2014, he has no criminal antecedents and the fine amount has already been deposited by him, therefore, the jail sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 4. On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposed the appeal and supported the impugned judgment. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record minutely. 6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering that out of total jail sentence of 1 year, the Appellant has undergone about 1 month 8 days, the quantity of seized contraband i.e. 1 kg 290 grams, he is facing the lis since September 2014 and there is no criminal antecedent against him and looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the Appellant, the jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. 7. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the Appellant under the aforementioned section is affirmed and he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. The fine sentence is affirmed. 8. Records of the Court below be sent back along with a copy of this order forthwith for information and necessary compliance. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Saurabh