The appellant has raised before Court a novel question based on the provisions of the N.D.P.S. (Amendment) Act 9 of 2001. The contention is that the conviction contemplated in Section 20(b)(ii) (B) of the N.D.P.S. Act, as it stands amended now, violates Articles 20 of the Constitution of India as far as pre-amendment accusations are concerned.

2. It is pointed out that under the law as it stood on 25-10-2000 which is the date of occurrence in this case, for possession of ganja in question the appellant was liable for pubishment with imprisonment which could extend only upto 5 years and fine which could extend only upto 5 years and fine which could extend only upto Rs.50,000/-, whereas by application of Section 20(b) (ii) (B) as contemplated in Section 41 of the Amendment Act 9 of 2001, the offence would get converted to one attracting imprisonment which could extend upto 10 years and fine which could extend upto Rs. 1 Lakh. The contention is that notwithstanding the further provision in Section 41 of the Amendment Act itself that the accused need be given only the lesser of the two punishments above, the conviction itself becomes violate of Article 20 of the Constitution