Sentence reduced to period already undergone for intermediate quantity of ganja upon enhancing fine amount.

The appellant was charged under Crime No. 186/2021 at Police Station Pathrota after being found in possession of 5.294 kg of Ganja

On 05.12.2025, the Special Judge (NDPS), Narmadapuram, convicted the appellant for offences under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, sentencing him to three years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000

The appellant challenged this judgment via a criminal appeal under Section 415(2) of the BNSS, 2023 (or Section 374(2) of the CrPC), specifically seeking a reduction in sentence rather than contesting the conviction on merits

The appellant had already served approximately one year and one month of his three-year sentence

1. Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act is sustainable based on the evidence on record

2. Whether the sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment should be reduced to the period already undergone (approx. 13 months) given that the appellant is a first-time offender and the quantity of contraband is intermediate

Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which prohibits the possession of manufactured drugs and provides penalties for intermediate quantities of cannabis

Section 415(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, and Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, relating to appeals from convictions

Although the appellant did not contest the merits of the conviction, the High Court performed an independent reappraisal of the evidence to satisfy its legal obligation

The Court found the testimony of prosecution witnesses corroborated by material evidence, confirming the seizure of 5.294 kg of Ganja—an intermediate quantity—from the appellant's possession

For the sentencing phase, the Court weighed the nature of the accusation against the appellant’s status as a first-time offender with no criminal antecedents

The Court reasoned that since the appellant had already served over thirteen months of incarceration, the ends of justice would be met by modifying the sentence to "period already undergone," provided the fine was significantly enhanced to serve as a sufficient deterrent

The appellant’s jail sentence was reduced to the period already undergone, while the fine was enhanced from Rs. 5,000 to Rs. 30,000. The Court ordered the appellant's immediate release, subject to the payment of the enhanced fine within two months; failure to pay results in a return to custody to serve the original default sentence