[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Pawan Kumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 March, 2026
1/9
2026:CGHC:13446
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 237 of 2020
• Pawan Kumar S/o Ashok Kumar Aged About 24 Years R/o Balhaira,
Post Malpura, P.S. City Kotwali, Malpura, Agra, Uttarpradesh., District :
Agra, Uttar Pradesh
... Appellant(s)
versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station,
G.R.P. Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur,
Chhattisgarh
---Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. Suresh Tandon, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma,
Judgment on Board
20.03.2026
1. 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 29.01.2020 passed by the learned Special Judge
(N.D.P.S. Act) Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) in Special Criminal
Case No. 65/2018, whereby the appellant has been convicted and
sentenced as follows:-
Digitally
signed by
JYOTI JHA
Date:
2026.03.20
16:55:38
+0530
Convicted Sentenced to
under 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 1 year.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 09.07.2018, Sub-Inspector
L.S. Rajput of Police Station G.R.P., Raipur received information
from an informant that three young men were sitting under the over-
bridge at Platform No. 1 towards Durg side, each carrying bags
containing contraband ganja. The said information was recorded in
the daily diary vide Rojnamcha Sanha No. 7/18 (Exhibit P-18C).
Thereafter, Constable Ketaram Sahu was deputed to summon in-
dependent witnesses, who returned along with witnesses Santosh
Sahu and Farooq Memon. Notices under Section 160 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure (Exhibit P-01C) were served upon them, and
they were apprised of the informant's information and requested to
assist in its verification and further proceedings. Upon their oral
consent, an informant information panchnama (Exhibit P-02C) and
a search panchnama without warrant (Exhibit P-03C) were pre-
pared in their presence. Constable No. 377 Suresh Mishra was sent
with a dispatch to inform the superior officers, and he proceeded to-
wards the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Railway Police,
Raipur. Due to the likelihood of delay in the arrival of senior officers
and apprehension that the accused might dispose of the contra-
band, Assistant Sub-Inspector Gopi Singh Paikra, along with the
staff, witnesses, weighing scale, weights, and investigation kit, pro-
ceeded from the police station to Platform No. 1, Durg end. Further,
the prosecution case is that upon reaching the spot, the Station
House Officer observed that the persons matching the description
given by the informant attempted to flee on seeing the police. They
were apprehended and, upon interrogation, disclosed their names
as Apoorva Haldhar, Avadhesh Verma, and Pawan Kumar. Each of
them was found in possession of a backpack/air bag. Further, it is
stated that Assistant Sub-Inspector Gopi Singh Paikra, in the pres-
ence of the Station House Officer, proceeded against accused
Pawan Kumar by serving him a notice under Section 50 of the
NDPS Act (Exhibit P-04), informing him of his legal right to have the
search conducted before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer. The
accused consented to have his bag searched by the investigating
officer, and a consent memo (Exhibit P-05) was prepared. Prior to
conducting the search, the investigating officer offered his own
search as well as that of the staff and witnesses to the accused,
which yielded no contraband substance. Thereafter, upon search-
ing the backpack of the accused, a large packet was found inside,
containing a greenish leafy and flowering substance. On preliminary
examination at the spot, the substance was identified as ganja. A
seizure and physical verification panchnama (Exhibit P-07) was
prepared. The contraband was weighed and homogenized at the
spot, and its total weight was found to be 14 kilograms. Out of the
same, 50 grams was separated and sealed as sample A-1. A rail-
way journey ticket was also seized from the possession of the ac-
cused. The sample packet and the remaining contraband were
sealed in the same bag at the spot. Upon returning to the police sta-
tion, the First Information Report (Exhibit P-17) was registered. The
seized contraband and sample were handed over to Head Consta-
ble Chintamani for safe custody, and a certificate in this regard (Ex-
hibit P-16) was issued by the Malkhana Moharrir. The accused was
arrested, and information of his arrest was given to his family mem-
bers. During further investigation, the Station House Officer S.L. Ra-
jput sent the seized sample for chemical examination to the Foren-
sic Science Laboratory, Raipur, along with a forwarding letter (Ex-
hibit P-26) issued by the Superintendent of Police, Railway. The re-
ceipt thereof is Exhibit P-12A. The FSL report (Exhibit P-29) con-
firmed that sample A-1 contained ganja. Upon completion of the en-
tire investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the competent
Court.
3. The learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act) Raipur District Raipur,
C.G., after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available
on record vide judgment dated 29.01.2020, convicted the appellant
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 or-
der.
4. The appellant was in custody from 09.07.2018 to 28.01.2020 and
thereafter he was in jail from 29.01.2020 to 15.10.2020 (total jail pe-
riod 2 years, 3 months and 6 days.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is
innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid
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 prosecution is very
shaky and unbelievable. The Trial Court failed to appreciate the evi-
dence and documents available on record.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that he does not
want to press this appeal on merits and confine his arguments to
the sentence part thereof only. Further, learned counsel for appel-
lant submits that the appellant at present is aged about 32 years
and as he is facing criminal trial since 2018 and the appellant has
already undergone more than 2 years, 3 months and 6 days
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 un-
dergone 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.
7. Learned State Counsel submits that the Trial Court has rightly con-
victed and sentenced the appellant, 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.
9. From perusal of the records, it transpires that on 09.07.2018, Sub-
Inspector L.S. Rajput of Police Station G.R.P., Raipur received in-
formation from an informant that three young men were sitting un-
der the overbridge at Platform No. 1 towards Durg side, each carry-
ing bags containing contraband ganja. The said information was
recorded in the daily diary vide Rojnamcha Sanha No. 7/18 (Exhibit
P-18C). Thereafter, Constable Ketaram Sahu was deputed to sum-
mon independent witnesses, who returned along with witnesses
Santosh Sahu and Farooq Memon. Notices under Section 160 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure (Exhibit P-01C) were served upon
them, and they were apprised of the informant's information and re-
quested to assist in its verification and further proceedings. Upon
their oral consent, an informant information panchnama (Exhibit P-
02C) and a search panchnama without warrant (Exhibit P-03C)
were prepared in their presence. Constable No. 377 Suresh Mishra
was sent with a dispatch to inform the superior officers, and he pro-
ceeded towards the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Railway
Police, Raipur. Due to the likelihood of delay in the arrival of senior
officers and apprehension that the accused might dispose of the
contraband, Assistant Sub-Inspector Gopi Singh Paikra, along with
the staff, witnesses, weighing scale, weights, and investigation kit,
proceeded from the police station to Platform No. 1, Durg end. Fur-
ther, the prosecution case is that upon reaching the spot, the Sta-
tion House Officer observed that the persons matching the descrip-
tion given by the informant attempted to flee on seeing the police.
They were apprehended and, upon interrogation, disclosed their
names as Apoorva Haldhar, Avadhesh Verma, and Pawan Kumar.
Each of them was found in possession of a backpack/air bag. Fur-
ther, it is stated that Assistant Sub-Inspector Gopi Singh Paikra, in
the presence of the Station House Officer, proceeded against ac-
cused Pawan Kumar by serving him a notice under Section 50 of
the NDPS Act (Exhibit P-04), informing him of his legal right to have
the search conducted before a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer.
The accused consented to have his bag searched by the investigat-
ing officer, and a consent memo (Exhibit P-05) was prepared. Prior
to conducting the search, the investigating officer offered his own
search as well as that of the staff and witnesses to the accused,
which yielded no contraband substance. Thereafter, upon search-
ing the backpack of the accused, a large packet was found inside,
containing a greenish leafy and flowering substance. On preliminary
examination at the spot, the substance was identified as ganja. A
seizure and physical verification panchnama (Exhibit P-07) was
prepared. The contraband was weighed and homogenized at the
spot, and its total weight was found to be 14 kilograms. Out of the
same, 50 grams was separated and sealed as sample A-1. A rail-
way journey ticket was also seized from the possession of the ac-
cused. The sample packet and the remaining contraband were
sealed in the same bag at the spot. Upon returning to the police sta-
tion, the First Information Report (Exhibit P-17) was registered. The
seized contraband and sample were handed over to Head Consta-
ble Chintamani for safe custody, and a certificate in this regard (Ex-
hibit P-16) was issued by the Malkhana Moharrir. The accused was
arrested, and information of his arrest was given to his family mem-
bers. During further investigation, the Station House Officer S.L. Ra-
jput sent the seized sample for chemical examination to the Foren-
sic Science Laboratory, Raipur, along with a forwarding letter (Ex-
hibit P-26) issued by the Superintendent of Police, Railway. The re-
ceipt thereof is Exhibit P-12A. The FSL report (Exhibit P-29) con-
firmed that sample A-1 contained ganja.
10. 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 possession of the ac-
cused and the IO has also followed the norms of 52A, 55 and 57 of
the NDPS Act. The IO has taken samples of 50:50 grams of ganja
and sent for FSL test and FSL report is positive. The trial Court af-
ter considering the material available on record and evidence of the
prosecution witnesses, convicted the appellant for the offence un-
der 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 pros-
ecution, 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.
Therefore, the conviction of the appellant is maintained.
11. As regards the sentence awarded to them. Considering the fact that
the appellant is facing criminal trial since 2018 and thereafter more
than 8 years has been elapsed, considering the age of the appellant
at present and further considering the quantity of contraband seized
from the possession of the appellant i.e. 14 kg contraband(ganja),
which is intermediate quantity and there is no previous criminal an-
tecedents against him and further the appellant has already under-
gone 2 years, 3 months and 6 days of jail sentence awarded by the
trial Court and bail was also granted to him by this Court on
15.10.2020, there would be no useful purpose to send the appellant
in jail as he has already suffered undergone sentence and also
agony of criminal trial for so many years, that meets the ends of jus-
tice. So this Court finds it appropriate to reduce the sentence from RI
for 5 years under Section 20(b)(ii-B) of the N.D.P.S. to the period al-
ready undergone by the appellant of jail sentence. However, fine
amount is maintained.
12. With the aforesaid observations, the criminal appeal is partly al-
lowed to the extent indicated hereinabove.
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
Jyoti
