‘Neutral Substance’ Apart From ‘Offending Drug’ Must Be Considered While Determining “Small Or Commercial Quantity” Under NDPS Act: Chhattisgarh HC
The Chhattisgarh High Court partly allowed a batch of Criminal Appeals and reduced the sentence of two accused persons under the NDPS Act.
The Chhattisgarh High Court observed that while considering the mixture of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substance for the purpose of determining whether it would constitute “small quantity or commercial quantity”, not only the quantity of ‘offending drug’ but the quantity of ‘neutral substance’ mixed should also be taken into consideration.
The Court observed thus in a batch of two Criminal Appeals arising out of same Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal referred to the Supreme Court’s Judgment in the case of Hira Singh and Another v. Union of India and Another (2020) in which it was held, “… the quantity of neutral substance (s) is not to be taken into consideration and it is only actual content of the weight of the offending drug, which is relevant for the purpose of determining whether it would constitute “small quantity or commercial quantity”, cannot be accepted.”
Advocates Anju Ahuja and Surfaraj Khan appeared for the Appellants/Accused while Government Advocate Sangharsh Pandey appeared for the Respondent/State.
Facts of the Case
The Appellants-accused persons were convicted for the offence under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 12 years along with a fine of Rs. 1,10,000/- each. As per the prosecution case, in 2018, the Sub-Inspector received an information that the Appellants were standing on the side of the main road with illegal narcotics syrup in a bag and were waiting for a small vehicle to come from Ambikapur. Both the suspects were informed about the same and were given notice under Section 50 NDPS Act, on which the suspects gave acceptance for their respective search. On search of Accused No.1, a cement colour trolley bag with Flyte King company's monochrome was found in his possession, which was opened and searched.
R.C. KUFF COUGH SYRUP total 143 pieces, each containing 100 ml was found in it and a backpack in possession of the Accused No. 2 contained CODECTUS COUGH SYRUP 70 pieces, each containing 100 ml and ELDER QREX COUGH SYRUP 23 pieces, each of 100 ml in vials with labels containing a substance called Codeine Phosphate which was a narcotic drug, due to which search panchnama of the suspects was prepared. The bags were recovered from the possession of the accused persons and a total of 236 psychotropic substance syrups were recovered. Thereafter, the case was registered against them and the Trial Court convicted them. Hence, they were before the High Court.
Reasoning
The High Court in the above regard, said, “… we are of the considered opinion that the quantity so seized from the possession of the accused/ appellants would fall under the category of commercial quantity.”
The Court added that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. However, considering the fact that no specific reason was given by the Trial Court while awarding sentence, it affirmed the conviction of the Appellants but reduced their sentence from 12 years to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment.
Accordingly, the High Court partly allowed the Appeals and modified the sentence.
Cause Title- Ambika Vishwakarma v. State of Chhattisgarh (Neutral Citation: 2025:CGHC:2738-DB)
Appearance:
Appellants: Advocates Anju Ahuja, Surfaraj Khan, Yashesh Ahuja, and Rishi Sahu.
Respondent: Government Advocate Sangharsh Pandey
