[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Anish Mohammad @ Anij vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 6 April, 2026
1/8
2026:CGHC:15482
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 201 of 2018
Anish Mohammad @ Anij S/o Bisahu Mohammad Aged About 55 Years R/o
Rumgadha, Police Station Balco Nagar, Korba District Korba Chhattisgarh,
District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Balco
Nagar, Korba District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh
---Respondent
For Appellant : Ms. Laxmin Tondey, Advocate.
For Respondent : Ms. Avelin Juneja Gambhir, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma,
Judgment on Board
06.04.2026
1. Today, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant when the mat-
ter was called out. This Court therefore requested for assistance
from a counsel of the High Court Legal Service Committee. Ms.
Laxmin Tondey, Advocate, has been nominated to assist the
Court.
2. I have gone through the judgment under appeal and the deposi-
tions of witnesses and exhibits assisted both by Ms. Laxmin
Tondey through the High Court Legal Services Committee and
learned State Counsel. In view of (2014) 14 SCC 222 (Surya
Baksh Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh), I do not consider it nec-
essary to adjourn this case and issue fresh notice to the appel-
lants as their interest has been duly taken care of by nominating
another counsel from the High Court Legal Services Committee.
3. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of
Cr.P.C. by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 10.01.2018 passed by the learned Spe-
cial Judge (N.D.P.S. Act) Korba District Korba (C.G.) in Special
NDPS No. 01/2017, whereby the appellant has been convicted
and sentenced as follows:-
Convicted un- Sentenced to
der Sections
20(b)(ii-B) of R.I. for 5 year with fine of Rs.
N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 10,000/- and in default of payment
of fine, additional R.I. for 6 months.
4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 01.02.2017, the Assis-
tant Sub-Inspector of Police Station Balko Nagar, namely
Puhupram Sahu, received secret information from an informant
that the accused, Anis Mohammad @ Anij, had concealed a
large quantity of narcotic substance (ganja) in his house. Acting
upon the said information, and after complying with the manda-
tory provisions of the NDPS Act, he proceeded to the house of
the accused situated at Roomgadha along with NDPS kit, inde-
pendent witnesses, and accompanying police staff for verifica-
tion. Upon reaching the spot, the accused was interrogated, and
prior to conducting the search, personal search of the accused as
well as of the police personnel was conducted in the presence of
witnesses, during which no incriminating article was found.
Thereafter, upon obtaining consent of the accused, a search of
his house was conducted. During the search, from an almirah in
the hall, one white-colored Rajshree gutkha bag (Article-A) and
one yellow-colored plastic sack (Article-B) were recovered. On
opening the white Rajshree gutkha bag, one white bag and one
green bag containing some substance were found. Similarly, in-
side the yellow plastic sack, 8 plastic packets containing sub-
stance were found. Upon examination in the presence of wit-
nesses, the said substance was identified as ganja. The contra-
band recovered from the possession of the accused, i.e., Article-
A, was weighed on a duly verified weighing scale and found to be
1 kilogram 800 grams. The substance contained in 8 plastic
packets of Article-B was also weighed and found to be 9 kilo-
grams. Thus, a total of 10 kilograms and 800 grams of ganja was
recovered from the possession of the accused. Additionally, a
sum of ₹3,700/- was also recovered from the possession of the
accused, which was alleged to be proceeds from the sale of
ganja. During the search, samples of 50 grams each were drawn
from both the seized substances and were further divided into 25
grams each, thereby preparing four sample packets in accor-
dance with procedure. The accused was informed of the grounds
of arrest, and after informing his relatives, he was duly arrested.
Thereafter, the police party returned to Police Station Balko Na-
gar, where the seized contraband, sample packets, and cash
amount were deposited in the Malkhana. On account of the com-
mission of the offence by the accused, Crime No. 28/2017 was
registered against him under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act. The
samples were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for exami-
nation, where the substance was confirmed to be ganja. Upon
completion of necessary investigation, the charge-sheet was filed
before the competent Court on 31.03.2017
5. The learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act) Korba District Korba,
C.G., after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available
on record vide judgment dated 10.01.2018, convicted the appel-
lant for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii-B) of the
N.D.P.S. and sentenced him as mentioned in opening paragraph
of this order.
6. The appellant was in custody from 02.02.2017 to 10.01.2018
and thereafter he was in jail from 10.01.2018 to 19.07.2018 (total
jail period 1 year, 5 months and 17 days.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant
is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the afore-
said case and the mandatory provisions have not been followed
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 prosecu-
tion is very shaky and unbelievable. The Trial Court failed to ap-
preciate the evidence and documents available on record.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that he does
not want to press this appeal on merits and confine his argu-
ments to the sentence part thereof only. Further, learned counsel
for appellant submits that the appellant at present is aged about
64 years and as he is facing criminal trial since 2017 and the ap-
pellant has already undergone more than 1 year, 5 months and
17 days awarded by the trial Court. There is also no previous
criminal antecedents against the appellant. Therefore, the jail
sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period
already undergone by him. Learned counsel for appellant placed
his reliance upon the decisions of the Coordinate Bench of this
High Court in the matters of Ajay Kumar Sarthi V. State of
Chhattisgarh in CRA No. 243 of 2022, Pritam Patel Vs. State
of Chhattisgarh in CRA No. 903 of 2015 and Yogendra Singh
Markam Vs. State of Chhattisgarh in CRA No. 1760 of 2022,
the Cor-ordinate Bench has reduced the sentence to the period
already undergone, and therefore, similar relief may be extended
to the appellants herein as well.
9. Learned State Counsel submits that the Trial Court has rightly
convicted and sentenced the appellant, in which no interference
is called for.
10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their ri-
val submissions made hereinabove and also went through the
records with utmost circumspection.
11. From perusal of the records, it transpires that on 01.02.2017, the
Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police Station Balko Nagar, namely
Puhupram Sahu, received secret information from an informant
that the accused, Anis Mohammad @ Anij, had concealed a large
quantity of narcotic substance (ganja) in his house. Acting upon
the said information, and after complying with the mandatory pro-
visions of the NDPS Act, he proceeded to the house of the ac-
cused situated at Roomgadha along with NDPS kit, independent
witnesses, and accompanying police staff for verification. Upon
reaching the spot, the accused was interrogated, and prior to con-
ducting the search, personal search of the accused as well as of
the police personnel was conducted in the presence of witnesses,
during which no incriminating article was found. Thereafter, upon
obtaining consent of the accused, a search of his house was con-
ducted. During the search, from an almirah in the hall, one white-
colored Rajshree gutkha bag (Article-A) and one yellow-colored
plastic sack (Article-B) were recovered. On opening the white Ra-
jshree gutkha bag, one white bag and one green bag containing
some substance were found. Similarly, inside the yellow plastic
sack, 8 plastic packets containing substance were found. Upon
examination in the presence of witnesses, the said substance was
identified as ganja. The contraband recovered from the posses-
sion of the accused, i.e., Article-A, was weighed on a duly verified
weighing scale and found to be 1 kilogram 800 grams. The sub-
stance contained in 8 plastic packets of Article-B was also
weighed and found to be 9 kilograms. Thus, a total of 10 kilo-
grams and 800 grams of ganja was recovered from the posses-
sion of the accused. Additionally, a sum of ₹3,700/- was also re-
covered from the possession of the accused, which was alleged to
be proceeds from the sale of ganja. During the search, samples of
50 grams each were drawn from both the seized substances and
were further divided into 25 grams each, thereby preparing four
sample packets in accordance with procedure. The accused was
informed of the grounds of arrest, and after informing his relatives,
he was duly arrested. Thereafter, the police party returned to Po-
lice Station Balko Nagar, where the seized contraband, sample
packets, and cash amount were deposited in the Malkhana. On
account of the commission of the offence by the accused, Crime
No. 28/2017 was registered against him under Section 20(b) of
the NDPS Act.
12. From perusal of the case it appears that Investigation Officer has
followed the mandatory provisions of Section 42(1) 42(2) of the
NDPS Act 1985 and after giving information to the Superior
Gazette Officer, he recovered ganja from the exclusive posses-
sion of the accused and the IO has also followed the norms of
52A, 55 and 57 of the NDPS Act. The IO has taken samples of
25:25 grams of ganja and sent for FSL test and FSL report is pos-
itive. The trial Court after considering the material available on
record and evidence of the prosecution witnesses, convicted the
appellant for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii-B) of the N.D.P.S.
and sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years to appellant and fine of
Rs. 10,000/-. Considering the material available on record and the
evidence adduced by the prosecution, I am of the view that the
Trial Court did not commit any illegality or infirmity in the findings
recorded by Trial Court as regards conviction of the appellant un-
der Section 20(b)(ii-B) of the N.D.P.S. Therefore, the conviction of
the appellant is maintained.
13.As regards the sentence awarded to them. Considering the fact
that the appellant is facing criminal trial since 2017 and thereafter
more than 9 years has been elapsed, considering the age of the
appellant at present and further considering the quantity of contra-
band seized from the possession of the appellant i.e. 10 kg 800
gram contraband(ganja), which is intermediate quantity and there
is no previous criminal antecedents against him and further the
appellant has already undergone 1 year, 5 months and 17 days of
jail sentence awarded by the trial Court and bail was also granted
to him by this Court on 19.07.2018, there would be no useful pur-
pose to send the appellant in jail as he has already suffered un-
dergone sentence and also agony of criminal trial for so many
years, that meets the ends of justice. So this Court finds it appro-
priate to reduce the sentence from RI for 5 years under Section
20(b)(ii-B) of the N.D.P.S. to the period already undergone by the
appellant of jail sentence. However, fine amount is maintained.
14. With the aforesaid observations, the criminal appeal is partly al-
lowed to the extent indicated hereinabove.
15. 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
Jyoti
