[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Sanat Kumar Pobiya vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 March, 2026

                                  1




                                                 2026:CGHC:13447


                                                               NAFR

         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR


                       CRA No. 294 of 2018

1 - Sanat Kumar Pobiya S/o Ran Sai Pobiya Aged About 33 Years
R/o Village Shalhe Tahsil And Thana Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa
Chhattisgarh.

2 - Narendra Patel S/o Babulal Patel Aged About 47 Years R/o
Village Reda Tahsil And Thana Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa
Chhattisgarh. (Abated)
                                              ... Appellants

                              versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Dabhra, District Janjgir
Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
                                                   ---- Respondent

_______________________________________________________

For Appellants : Mr. Ramakant Patel, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Banhiman Roy, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Suresh Tandan, PL ______________________________________________________

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma

Judgment on Board

20/03/2026

1. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellants would submit

that during the pendency of this appeal, appellant No.2 namely

Narendra Patel has died on 23.03.2021. In this regard his death

certificate is also placed on record.

2. As there is no application has been filed under Section 394 of

Cr.P.C., 1973 for continuation of appeal by the legal heirs of the

appellant No.2 within a period of 30 days from the date of death

of appellant No.2, hence, this appeal is abated on his behalf.

Now, this Court proceed to here the appeal on behalf of

Appellant No.1 - Sanat Kumar Pobiya only.

3. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant under

Section 374(2) of CrPC being aggrieved with the judgment of

conviction and order of sentence dated 16.02.2018 passed in

NDPS Case No.27/2017 by the Special Judge (NDPS), Janjgir-

Champa (C.G.), whereby the trial Court has convicted the

appellant as under :

        Conviction            Sentence             In Default

      Under Section       R.I. for 03 years     In default of
      20(b)(ii)(B) of     and fine amount of    payment       of
      the      Narcotic   Rs.10,000/-           fine    amount
      Drugs        and                          further R.I. for
      Psychotropic                              06 months
      Substances
      Act, 1985

4. According to the case of prosecution is that on 12.09.2017,

N.K. Tiwari, Sub Inspector of PS Dabhra received the secret

information from the informant that two persons were

carrying contraband Ganja in motorcycle from village

Shalhe. On the basis of said information, the police have

seized total 09 kg and 180 gram of Ganja from the

possession of the appellant. After due procedure, the

appellant was arrested, and offence was registered against

the accused and after due investigation charge sheet was

filed against the accused/appellant.

5. So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution

has examined as many as 10 witnesses and exhibited 43

documents. The statement of the accused/appellant was

also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he

denied the circumstances appearing against him and

pleaded innocence and false implication in the case.

6. After hearing the parties, vide impugned judgment of

conviction and order of sentence dated 16.02.2018, learned

Special Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant

as mentioned in para-3 of this judgment. Hence, the present

appeal.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant

contended that he does not wants to press this appeal on

merits and confines his argument to the sentence part only.

He further submits that the incident is of the year 2017 and

he is facing lis since 2017. Appellant has undergone about

05 months and 12 days, therefore, it is prayed that the jail

sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the

period already undergone by him.

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the State/respondent

opposes the argument raised by counsel for the appellant,

supported the impugned judgment and submits that

sentence awarded by the trial Court is just and proper and

requires no interference.

9. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

parties and perused the material available on record with

utmost circumspection.

10. On perusal of the records, I have found that on 12.09.2017,

N.K. Tiwari, Sub Inspector of PS Dabhra received the secret

information from the informant that two persons were

carrying contraband Ganja in motorcycle from village

Shalhe. On the basis of said information, the police have

seized total 09 kg and 180 gram of Ganja from the

possession of the appellant. After due procedure, the

appellant was arrested, and offence was registered against

the accused and after due investigation charge sheet was

filed against the accused/appellant.

11. Under Section 42 of the NDPS Act, 1985 prescribed for

power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without warrant or

authorization.

12. The next issue that falls for our consideration is with respect

to the compliance of Section 42 of the NDPS Act 1985. For

the said purposes, an analysis of the bare text of Section 42

of the NDPS Act 1985 is undertaken hereinafter. Section 42

of the NDPS Act 1985 is worded as follows:

"42. Power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without

warrant or authorisation.--

(l) Any such officer (being an officer superior in rank to a peon,

sepoy or constable) of the departments of central excise,

narcotics, customs, revenue intelligence or any other

department of the Central Government including para-military

forces or armed forces as is empowered in this behalf by

general or special order by the Central Government, or any

such officer (being an officer superior in rank to a peon, sepoy

or constable) of the revenue, drugs control, excise, police or

any other department of a State Government as is empowered

in this behalf by general or special order of the State

Government, if he has reason to believe from personal

knowledge or information given by any person and taken down

in writing that any narcotic drug, or psychotropic substance, or

controlled substance in respect of which an offence punishable

under this Act has been committed or any document or other

article which may furnish evidence of the commission of such

offence or any illegally acquired property or any document or

other article which may furnish evidence of holding any illegally

acquired property which is liable for seizure or freezing or

forfeiture under Chapter VA of this Act is kept or concealed in

any building, conveyance or enclosed place, may between

sunrise and sunset,--

(a)enter into and search any such building, conveyance or

place;

(b)in case of resistance, break open any door and remove any

obstacle to such entry;

(c)seize such drug or substance and all materials used in the

manufacture thereof and any other article and any animal or

conveyance which he has reason to believe to be liable to

confiscation under this Act and any document or other article

which he has reason to believe may furnish evidence of the

commission of any offence punishable under this Act or furnish

evidence of holding any illegally acquired property which is

liable for seizure or freezing or forfeiture under Chapter VA of

this Act; and

(d)detain and search, and, if he thinks proper, arrest any

person whom he has reason to believe to have committed any

offence punishable under this Act:

[Provided that in respect of holder of a licence for manufacture

of manufactured drugs or psychotropic substances or

controlled substances granted under this Act or any rule or

order made thereunder, such power shall be exercised by an

officer not below the rank of sub-inspector:

Provided further that] if such officer has reason to believe

that a search warrant or authorisation cannot be obtained

without affording opportunity for the concealment of evidence

or facility for the escape of an offender, he may enter and

search such building, conveyance or enclosed place at any

time between sunset and sunrise after recording the grounds of

his belief.

(2) Where an officer takes down any information in writing

under sub-section (1) or records grounds for his belief under

the proviso thereto, he shall within seventy-two hours send a

copy thereof to his immediate official superior."

13. On perusal of the record, it transpires that the Investigating

Officer has complied with provision of Sections 42, 52-A (3) &

55 of the NDPS Act.

14. The Report of Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, which

shows that the samples of seized articles have been found

positive. Therefore, in considered opinion of this Court, the trial

Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the offence

punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. I do not

find any illegality and infirmity in the findings recorded by the

trial Court with regard to the conviction part.

15. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case,

particularly, considering the fact that the contraband Ganja