IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 821 OF 2015 (C)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI UMESHA S/O VEERABHADRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O AREKERE VILLAGE, JAVAGAL HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT 56.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRATHEEP K C., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANAVARA POLICE STATION REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, Digitally signed by BANGALORE 01.

LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M.DIWAKAR MADDUR, HCGP)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.6.2015 PASSED BY THE PRL. S.J. AND SPL. JUDGE, HASSAN IN SPL. CASE (NDPS) NO.71/2009 - CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 20(b) OF N.D.P.S. ACT, 1985 AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

ORAL JUDGMENT

The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 30.06.2015 passed in Spl.Case(NDPS)No.71/2009 by the Principal Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Hassan (for short 'the trial Court').

2. For the sake of convenience the parties herein are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court. 3. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that, the Circle Inspector of Police, Rural Circle, Arasikere, laid a charge-sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as 'the NDPS Act').

4. It is alleged by the prosecution that, on

17.07.2009 at about 05.30 p.m. in the house of accused at Arekere Village, the accused was found in possession of 3 kgs 850 grams of ganja for the purpose of sale in contravention of the provisions of the NDPS Act. Thus, the accused has committed the offence punishable under Section 20(b) of NDPS Act, 1985.

5. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 20(b) of NDPS Act, 1985.

6. The accused was enlarged on bail and after filing the charge sheet, case was registered in a Special Case No. 71/2009. On hearing the charges, trial Court has framed the charges for the commission of alleged offence under Section 20(b) of NDPS Act, 1985. Same were read over and explained to the accused. Having understood the same accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. To prove the guilt of the accused, in all Ten witnesses were examined as PWs.1 to 10. Ten documents were marked as Exhibits P1 to P10 and three material objects were marked as MO Nos.1 to 3.

8. On closure of prosecution side evidence, statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C was recorded. The accused has totally denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses. However, he did not choose to lead any defence evidence on the his behalf.

9. Having heard the arguments on both sides, the trial Court has convicted the accused for the offence on Section 20(b) of NDPS Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/-. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

10. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the impugned order passed by the trial Court is not sustainable either in law or on facts. The trial Court has completely failed to appreciate the case of the appellant. The trial Court has failed to observe the dictum of this Court in K.K. REJJI AND OTHERS v. STATE OF MURUDESHWAR POLICE STATION, wherein it is held that stems, leaves and branches cannot be termed as "ganja" in view of the definition of "ganja" in NDPS Act.

11. The Investigating Officer has not separated fruiting tops or flowering from the ganja plants from weighing. What has been done is that they have weighed entire plants to record the weight.