Chattisgarh High Court
Ajay Vishwas vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 8 September, 2025
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 1647 of 2025
1 - Shankar Biswas S/o Sudhanshu Vishwas Aged About 37 Years R/o Nalgunti,
P.S. - M.V. -79 Malkangiri, Dist- Malkangiri ( Odisha)
--- Appellant
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The P.S.- Abhanpur, Dist Raipur Chhattisgarh.
--- Respondent
CRA No. 1653 of 2025
1 - Ajay Vishwas S/o Shri Amrit Vishwas Aged About 27 Years R/o Nalgunti,
Police Station- M.V. 79, Malkangiri, (Orissa)
2 - Suraj Gain @ Gaye S/o Madhu Gain Aged About 19 Years R/o Nalgunti,
Police Station- M.V. 79, Malkangiri, (Orissa)
---Appellants
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station-
Abhanpur, District Raipur, C.G.
--- Respondent
Order Sheet
08/09/2025 Mr. Syed Ishhadil Ali, Advocate for the Appellant in CRA
No. 1647/2025. Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate for the Appellants in
CRA No. 1653/2025.
Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, P.L. for the Respondent/State.
Heard on admission.
Appeals are admitted for hearing.
Also heard on I.A. No. 01/2025 which are separate
applications for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the
appellant in both the appeals.
By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 04.08.2025 (Annexure A/1) passed by the
learned Special Judge (NDPS), Raipur, District - Raipur
(C.G.) in Special Criminal (NDPS Act) Case No. 219/2024,
has convicted and sentenced the Appellant as under:-
Conviction Sentence
U/s 20 (b) (ii) (B) of the NDPS R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.
Act, 1985 50,000/- in default R.I. for 06
months.
(the above sentence is awarded for all the respective
appellants)
Learned counsel for the respective appellants submits
that the prosecution failed to prove seizure of contraband
Ganja from the possession of appellants. In support of their
contention, they referred to para 38 of the evidence of Soman
Lal Sinha (PW-5), the Investigating Officer. They also submit
that the Constable i.e. Damodar Prasad Sahu (PW - 6) has
stated that the weight of Ganja which was kept in Malkhana
was 12.900 Kg from which, it is appearing that the sample
was not taken out from the contraband allegedly seized from
the possession of the appellants.
On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the
applications for suspension of sentence and would submit
that the Investigating Officer has very clearly stated that the
car in which the appellants were traveling was intercepted
and upon search, they have recovered contraband from
possession of appellants. All the procedures as provided
under the NDPS Act, 1985 has been done on spot, including
weighing and sealing of seized contraband. She also referred
to the evidence of Soman Lal Sinha (PW-5) and Damodar
Prasad Sahu (PW - 6) in support of her contention and
submitted that the witnesses have categorically stated that
the contraband Ganja was seized and thereafter, sample has
been obtained from the seized contraband.
I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances
of the case, submission of counsel for the respective parties,
evidence of Soman Lal Sinha (PW-5) and Damodar Prasad
Sahu (PW - 6), I do not find present to be fit cases to allow
the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to
the applicant.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 01/2025 filed in CRA No.
1647/2025 and CRA No. 1653/2025 stands dismissed.
List this case for final hearing.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
SHUBHAM
DEY
Dey
