Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.284 of 1997 dt.14-07-2011 Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.284 of 1997 Against the judgment and order dated 23.09.1997 passed by Sri S. N. Pathak, Sepecial Judge, Buxar in N.D.P.S. Act Case No. 07 of 1993. Murli Choudhary son of late Jamuna Choudhary resident of Golambra Buxar, P.S. Buxar (Industrial) District Buxar. .... .... Appellant/s Versus State Of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s For the Appellant/s : Mr. Parimal Choudhary, Advocate. Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. B.B. Singh, A.P.P. PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH) ANJANA PRAKASH, j. The appellant has been convicted under Section 20(b) (i) of the N.D.P.S. Act and 47 (a) of the Excise Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for three years under Section 20 (b) (i) of the N.D.P.S. Act and 47 (a) of the Excise Act passed by the special Judge, Buxar dated 23.09.1997 in N.D.P.S. Act Case No. 07 of 1993. 2. The case of the prosecution according to Om Prakash Gupta, P.W. 1 who was the Inspector of District Opium Authority Faizabad is that he was engaged in checking illegal trafficking of Ganja at which constituting a raiding party he searched the house of the appellant and from his house 1.200 K.G. Ganja was found kept in a tin container which was recovered and seized. 50 gram of Ganja was taken out as sample and was sent for testing. 3. During trial the prosecution examined six witnesses out of whom P.W. 1 is the informant himself whereas P.W.2 is the constable of Opium Factory. These two witnesses testified that on 26.07.1993 constituting a raiding party came to the house of the appellant and recovered 1.200 K.G. from the house of the appellant and seized the same. P.W. 5 is the chemical examiner Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.284 of 1997 dt.14-07-2011 who brought on record the report Ext. 3. According to him the analysis revealed that the same was Ganja. P.W. 4 Munna Prasad is a seizure list witness, whereas P.W. 6 is the investigating officer. 4. On analysis of the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution, I find no infirmity in the evidence of P.W. 1 and P.W.2 who are search and seizure witnesses and evidence that 1.200 K.G. Ganja was recovered from the house of the appellants cannot be denied. However, admittedly the Ganja was not recovered from the conscious possession of the appellant even though he is said to have been made a disclosure statement before the informant that he had kept the same for business purposes. The evidence of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 is further corroborated by the evidence of P.W. 5 who testified that the articles recovered were indeed Ganja. 5. In view of such cogent and trustworthy evidence, I am not inclined to interfere with the conviction of the appellant. In the result the appeal is dismissed. 6. However, considering that the appellant has remained custody for about one year and the ganja is not of commercial quantity the sentence is modified to the period already undergone during trial by him. 7. With these modifications in sentence, the appeal is dismissed. Patna High Court, Patna (Anjana Prakash, J.) Dated 14th July 2011 N.A.F.R./Devendra/