IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.A No.224 of 2008 Decided on : May 7, 2008 State of H.P. …Appellant. Versus Bhim Bahadur …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant : Mr. P.K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General. For the Respondent : Nemo. Surjit Singh, Judge( Oral ) Heard. 2. State is aggrieved by the judgment of the trial Court, whereby respondent Bhim Bahadur, who was charged with the offence, under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, for allegedly possessing commercial quantity of charas, has finally been convicted of the offence under clause (B) of Section 20 of the said Act, with the finding that the quantity of charas was less than commercial, though more than small. 3. A Division Bench of this Court, in Dharam Pal versus State of H.P. and another appeal (Latest HLJ 2007 (HP) 827), has held that only the resin content of the stuff is Charas and that in the absence of the report of the Chemical Examiner about the rest of the contents of the stuff, the quantity of the Charas, based on the percentage of the Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… resin found therein by the Chemical Examiner, is required to be re- worked out and the appellant-accused is to be held responsible for possessing Charas only to the extent, the stuff contains the resin content in it. Trial Court has worked out the quantity of the charas afresh, based on the aforesaid judgment. The quantity comes to 667.80 grams 4. Trial Court has sentenced the respondent to six years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.60,000/-. We see no illegality in the judgment of the trial Court. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. ( Surjit Singh ), J. May 7, 2008(sd) ( Surinder Singh ), J.