1 2026:CGHC:11108 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 252 of 2026 1 - Abhay Kumar Singh S/o Ramjee Singh Aged About 42 Years R/o Moti Sagar Para, Korba Police Station Kotwali, District Korba C.G., Presently R/o C.S.E.B. Colony Near Sai Mandir, Police Station Civil Line Rampur, District Korba C.G. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Chowki C.S.E.B., Police Station Kotwali, Korba, District Korba C.G. ... Respondent For the appellant : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, dvocate For the State : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order/Judgment on Board 03/03/2026 1. The present criminal appeal under Section 415 (2) of BNSS has been preferred by appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.11.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Korba, District – Korba (C.G.) in NDPS Case No. 21/2024 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under: Conviction : Sentence U/s 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act RI for 2 years with fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional RI for 1 month. HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.03.03 19:30:48 +0530 2 2. The case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 04.06.2024, Sub Inspector Bhim Sen Yadav received secret information through an informant that one Abhay Singh of Korba Purani Basti along with his partner Amar Prajapati are going to illegally buy and sell ganja at new bus stand. It was further informed that two people were coming from Jaijaipur to T.P. Nagar Korba to sell said ganja and if they are intercepted then the ganja smuggler will be caught red handed, in lieu of the above information the interception was done by the police and the raid was conducted and and further caught two person riding on Activa while carrying one -one packet of ganja each and they informed their name as Abhay Kumar Singh and Amar Prajapati. From the present appellant 1.138 kg ganja was seized and after due investigation, charge sheet was filed against the present appellant. 3. The prosecution has in all examined 13 witnesses and exhibited 84 documents to prove its case. The accused was examined under Section 313 CrPC, abjured the guilt and pleaded false implication. After conclusion of trial and considering the evidence of prosecution witnesses and material available on record, learned Trial Court by impugned judgment, convicted and sentenced the appellants, as mentioned above. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not challenge the finding of conviction but since the occurrence is related to the year 2024 and the accused/appellant has already served the jail sentence of 5 months and 13 days (from 05.06.2024 to 07.08.2024 during trial and from 20.11.2025 till date). He further submits that though the appellant has 3 criminal record, including 2 cases under the NDPS Act, out of which in one NDPS Act case he has 3 been acquitted. Therefore, the sentence awarded to the appellant for the aforesaid offence may be reduced to the period already undergone by him and he may be released from jail. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel supports the impugned judgment and opposes the arguments advanced on behalf of the Appellant and submits that the appellant has 3 criminal antecedents, including 2 cases under the NDPS Act. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the material available on record including the impugned judgment. 7. Having gone through the material available on record and the statements of injured witnesses Indrapal Singh Kanwar (P.W.1), Lakhan Lal Ratre (P.W.2), Virendra Mishra (P.W.4), Lalit Jaiswal (P.W.6), Dilip Minj (P.W.7), Prashant Dubey (P.W.8), Aslam Khan (P.W.9), Govind Singh (P.W.11), Mahipal Singh (P.W.12) and Ashish Thakur (P.W.13), establishes the involvement of the accused/appellant in the crime in question. Thus, considering the oral and documentary evidence on record the seizure of Ganja from the possession of the accused/appellant which was subsequently found to be Ganja as per FSL report vide Ex. P-80. This Court does not see any illegality in the findings recorded by the trial Court as regards conviction of the appellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. 8. However, as regards sentence, in Mohammad Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1977) 3 SCC 287, Hon’ble Supreme Court while emphasizing the reformative approach has exposited the 4 words expressed by George Bernard Shaw : “If you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries”. Para-9 of the said judgment is quoted below : “9. Western jurisprudes and 'sociologists, from their own angle have struck a like note. Sir Samual Romilly, critical of the brutal penalties in the then Britain, said in 1817 : "The laws of England are written in blood". Alfieri has suggested : 'society prepares the crime, the criminal commits it’. George Nicodotis, Director of Criminological Research Centre, Athens, Greece, maintains that 'Crime is the result of the lack of the right kind of education.' It is thus plain that crime is a pathological aberration, that the criminal can ordinarily be redeemed, that the State has to rehabilitate rather than avenge. The sub-culture that leads to anti-social behaviour has to be countered not by undue cruelty but by re-culturisation. Therefore, the focus of interest in penology is the individual, and goal is salvaging him for society. The infliction of harsh and savage punishment is thus a relic of past and regressive times. The human today views sentencing as a process of reshaping a person who has deteriorated into criminality and the modern community has a primary stake in the rehabilitation of the offender as a means of social defense. We, therefore consider a therapeutic, rather than an in 'terrorem' outlook, should prevail in our criminal courts, since brutal incarceration of the person merely produces laceration of his mind. In the words of George Bernard Shaw : 'If you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries'. We may permit ourselves the liberty to quote from Judge Sir Jeoffrey Streatfield : “If you are going to have anything to do with the criminal Courts, you should see for yourself the conditions under which prisoners serve their sentences.” 9. Applying the analogy laid down in Mohammad Giasuddin (supra) and keeping in view the fact that the maximum sentence imposed upon the appellant is 2 years under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act and the appellant is in jail since 20.11.2025 and as per the Arrest Memo (Ex.P.40), the appellant has studied upto graduate; and 5 was working private job and there are criminal antecedents against him, thus looking to the over-all circumstances it will be just and proper if the sentence of 2 years RI awarded by the trial court for aforesaid offence is reduced to 6 months RI. Accordingly, The conviction under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act is maintained and the sentence is reduced from R.I. for 2 years to R.I. for 6 months. However, the sentence of fine of Rs. 1000/- imposed by the trial Court is hereby enhanced to Rs. 10,000/-. In default of payment of fine amount enhanced/imposed by this Court today, the appellant shall liable to undergo additional R.I. for 4 months. Fine amount, if any, deposited by the appellant shall be adjusted. 10. The appellant was in jail from 05.06.2024 to 07.08.2024 and now he is in jail since 20.11.2025, i.e. total of 5 months and 13 days. His period of custody will be set off against the 6 months sentence. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated here-in-above. 12. Let a certified copy of this order along with the original record be transmitted to the concerned trial Court forthwith for information and necessary action. A copy of this judgment be also sent to the concerned Superintendent of Jail where the appellant is undergoing jail sentence. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu