Sentence reduced to period undergone for intermediate quantity of Ganja while enhancing fine amount.

On November 14, 2021, acting on secret information, police apprehended the appellant, Prahlad Patel, at Nohta Bridge, Damoh. Upon searching him, police recovered 4.800 kilograms of Ganja from his possession.

The appellant was subsequently charged and convicted by the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Damoh, in SC NDPS No. 01/2022 on March 31, 2026, and sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of ₹10,000.

The appellant filed this appeal under Section 415 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, challenging the sentence but not the conviction.

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

2. Whether the substantive sentence of three years should be reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant, considering his incarceration history and background.

Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which penalizes the possession of intermediate quantities of cannabis (Ganja).

Section 415 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

The court exercised its discretionary sentencing powers to balance the period of incarceration (over 2 years and 1 month) against the nature of the offender (first-time offender, not a hardened criminal) to determine if the "ends of justice" required a modification of the sentence.

The Court first reviewed the legality of the conviction. Despite the appellant's counsel conceding the conviction and focusing only on the quantum of sentence, the Court independently examined the oral and documentary evidence, as well as witness statements, finding no infirmity in the trial court's judgment.

Regarding the sentence, the Court noted that the appellant had already served 2 years and 1 month of a 3-year sentence and had no prior criminal record. The Court reasoned that keeping the appellant in custody further would serve no useful purpose.

Consequently, it determined that the ends of justice could be met by substituting the remaining jail time with a significant increase in the fine amount, thereby maintaining the deterrent effect while acknowledging the appellant's period of incarceration.

The Court enhanced the fine from ₹10,000 to ₹30,000, to be deposited within 45 days. Upon deposit of the enhanced fine, the appellant is to be released forthwith, subject to other pending cases; failure to deposit will result in the appellant serving the original substantive sentence.