2026:CGHC:9193-DB MANPREET NAFR KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.02.24 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

16:36:45 +0530 CRMP No. 542 of 2026 State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.)

... Petitioner(s)

versus Jaspal Singh S/o Late Shri Guruvak Singh Aged About 67 Years R/o Jagdalpur, Danteshwari Ward, Gali No. 03, Police City Kotwali, District Bastar (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Somya Rai, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

23.02.2026

1. Heard Mr. Somya Rai, learned Government Advocate for the appellant/State on I.A. No.01 of 2026, which is an application for condonation of delay of 60 days.

2. The State/appellant has preferred the instant application for grant of leave to appeal and appeal against the findings and judgment of acquittal dated 08.08.2025, passed in Special Criminal Case No. 237/2024, by the Court of learned Special Judge (NDPS Act), Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) whereby acquitting the respondent from the offence punishable under under Section 20(B)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act in connection with Crime No. 225/2024 at Police Station- Khamtarai, District- Raipur (C.G.).

3. Learned counsel for the appellant / State submits that though the scope of interference with an order of acquittal is limited, the appellate Court nonetheless possesses wide powers of re- appreciation of evidence, and where such reappraisal reveals that the findings of acquittal are unjust, perverse or against the weight of evidence, the appellate Court is fully empowered to reverse the same. Learned State counsel submits that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Trial Court is patently erroneous, perverse, and contrary to the settled principles of law. It is contended that there has been sufficient and substantial compliance of all the mandatory statutory provisions by the Investigating Authority while conducting the search and seizure proceedings. The documentary evidence on record unequivocally proves the recovery of total 37.450 Kg of narcotic substance (Ganja) from the conscious possession of the respondents/accused. The Investigating Officer (PW-06) has duly proved the entire search and seizure proceedings and there exists no material contradiction or infirmity to doubt the genuineness of the same. The recovery, seizure, weighing of the seized contraband and preparation of samples were conducted in the presence of independent witnesses and after due compliance of the statutory provisions. The FSL report (Ex. P-44) conclusively establishes that the seized articles were Ganja. The evidence on record clearly proves the guilt of the respondents/accused and there was no reasonable ground to create any doubt regarding the legality of search, recovery and seizure. It is further submitted that the learned trial Court itself, after detailed appreciation of evidence, has recorded a categorical finding that there was sufficient compliance of Sections 42, 50, 52 and 57 of the NDPS Act, thereby acknowledging substantial adherence to the statutory requirements. It is therefore submitted that the learned trial Court has erroneously held non-compliance of Sections 52A and 55 of the Act on extremely flimsy and technical grounds, despite clear evidence on record showing substantial compliance of the statutory mandate by the Investigating Officer.

4. It has been contended that the State, after obtaining necessary documents and information with respect to the case preferred the present petition, however, some delay was occurred due to fulfillment of various departmental formalities and working of the Government machinery because the State Government is a multi functioning body, hence, at times the fulfillment of departmental formalities takes unexpected long time. Therefore, in some cases the State is prevented from filing the case within the prescribed period of limitat