2026:CGHC:7689 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 872 of 2016 Sonu Pangi S/o Lakhan Pangi Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Jaipur, Sadar Jaipur, P.S. Sadar Jaipur, District Korapur, Orissa., Orissa ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. G R P Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Appellant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Dr. Surendra Kumar Dewangan, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Judgment on Board

11/02/2026

1. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C., 1973 by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.06.2016 passed by the learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.), in Spe- cial Criminal Case No. 895/2015, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as follows:-

Convicted Sentenced to U/s 20(b)(ii)(B) of R.I. for 4 years with fine of Rs. N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 20,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 6 months.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 08.07.2015, at 15:20 hrs., L.S. Rajput, Station House Officer/Sub-Inspector, GRP, Raipur, received information from an informant that two young men were carrying a backpack and a bag containing marijuana. They had arrived by bus and were sitting near the safe deposit box on Platform No. 1 of Raipur Railway Station, waiting for a train to Delhi. The police summoned witnesses and prepared an infor- mant's report and, in light of their inability to obtain a search war- rant, a warrantless search report. Both reports were sent to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Railway, Raipur. Upon arriving at the scene and finding the accused, Sonu Pangi, based on the informant's information, he was served with a notice requesting a magistrate or gazetted police officer to search his backpack and bag, or to have the investigating officer, L.S. Rajput, search his bag. The accused was given consent to be searched by the inves- tigating officer. The police allowed the accused to search wit- nesses and other staff members. A total of 10 kilograms of mari- juana was found in the accused's backpack and bag. This was identified, and two sample packets of fifty grams each were pre- pared from it. The marijuana and sample packets were sealed, and the marijuana and the train ticket found with the accused were seized from the accused. The police returned to the police station with the witnesses, the accused, and the seized goods and deposited them in the police station's storeroom. A First Informa- tion Report was filed. The accused was arrested. Witness state- ments were recorded. Information regarding the proceedings was sent to the senior police officer and the court. The seized sample packet was chemically tested at the State Forensic Science Labo- ratory, Raipur, and it was found to be marijuana. The police com- pleted the investigation and submitted the final report to this court on 03.09.2015. When charges were framed against the accused under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, he denied having committed the crime. During the trial under Section 313 of the CrPC, the accused pleaded innocence and falsely implicated.

3. The learned Special Judge (NDPS Act) Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.), after appreciating oral and documentary evidence avail- able on record vide judgment dated 30.06.2016, convicted the ap- pellant 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.

4. The appellant was in jail from 09.07.2015 to 13.12.2016 (around 1 year and 5 months).

5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is innocent person 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 con- victed and sentenced