2025:CGHC:57208 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 2314 of 2025 Balram Mandal S/o Dukhiram Mandal Aged About 31 Years R/o M.V. 48, P.S. Malkangiri, District Malkangiri (Orissa)

... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Kukanar District Sukma (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For Appellant : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Judgment on Board

25/11/2025

1. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 415 (2) of BNSS, 2023 by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.10.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.), in Special (NDPS) Case No. 24/2024, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as follows:-

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 01.10.2024 at 19:30 the police received a confidential report that one person was illegally transporting the narcotic substance marijuana from Odisha to Jag- dalpur via Sukma, in the trunk and plastic bag of a black coloured motorcycle bearing registration number OD-30/2533. Upon receiv- ing such information, police reached at the spot and caught hold the appellant. Upon checking, the police recovered 11.60 kg ganja from the possession of the appellant. Thereafter, the police regis- tered the case against present appellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B)

of NDPS Act.

3. The learned Special Judge (NDPS) South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.), after appreciating oral and documentary evidence avail- able on record vide judgment dated 31.10.2025, convicted the ap- pellants for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. and sentenced him as mentioned in opening para-

graph of this order.

4. The appellant was in jail from 01.10.2024 to 25.02.2025 during trial and he is in jail from the date of judgment dated 30.10.2025.

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 the appellant 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 appreci-

ate the evidence and documents available on record.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and confine his arguments to the sentence part thereof only. Further, he submits that the appellant at present is aged about 31 years and as he is facing criminal trial since 2024 and the appellant has already undergone around six months awarded by the trial Court in NDPS Case No. 24/2024. There is also no previous criminal antecedents against the appel- lant. Therefore, the jail sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

7. Learned Panel Laywer appearing for the respondent/State, sub-

mits that the Trial Court has rightly convicted 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 01.10.2024 at

19:30 the police received a confidential report that one person was illegally transporting the narcotic substance marijuana from Odisha to Jagdalpur via Sukma, in the trunk and plastic bag of a black coloured motorcycle bearing registration number OD- 30/2533. Upon receiving such information, police reached at the spot and caught hold the appella