'23. ^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR APPELLANT: (in Jai!) RESPONDENT: Criminal AppeaS No.1175 of 2001 G. Kashu, S/o Shri Raj Nayadu,aged about 19 years, R/o Village Chaudavaram, Pilortota, Distt. Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through Distt. Devas. {Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Crimina! Procedure, 1973} Present: Mr. Sunll Sahu, counsel for the appellant. Mr. Sameer Behar, Panei Lawyer for the State. Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J ORAL JUDGMENT (7-1-2009) 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23-11-2001 passed by the Specia! Judge, Durg in Special Case No.27-2001 whereby iearned Special Judge after holding the appellant guiity for commission of offence under Section 20 (b) of the Narcotlc Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, sentenced him to undergo R.l. for three years and pay a fine of Rs.15,000/-, in default of payment of flne to further undergo R.l. for six months. 2 The judgment is challenged on the ground that the Court below has without any credible and clinching evidence, convicted and sentenced the appeilant as aforementioned. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 18-4-2001 at about 4.35 a.m. the appeltant was present in the waiting hall of railway station Durg having 17 Kgs. of Ganja for sale. On the information of the informant, proceeding was conducted and after giving notice to the appellant, the Ganja was recovered, the same was examined and was aiso sent to the F.S.L. Special report and intimation to the superior officer vras sent, the F.I.R. was registered and finaily charge sheet was fiied. After conciusion @ of trial, the Court below has convicted & sentenced the appeliant in the aforesaid manner. 4. The appeal has not been admitted for final hearing, but substantive sentence of the appellant was suspended and he was granted bail vide order dated 7-2-2002, however, subsequently, on the ground of submission of fake surety, the appellant was again arrested on 23-12- 2003 and sent to jail for serving the sentence. The appejlant has completed the sentence. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that after completion of sentence by the appellant, the appeal has become infructuous. 6. I have heard learned counse! for the partjes and perused the record of the trial Court as also the judgment Impugned. 7. Materiai collected and evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution are sufficient for drawing inference that the appellant was In custody for possession of the contraband article Ganja. The prosecution after foliowing the procedure prescribed has recovered the said Ganja from the appellant. i do not find any irregularity or illegality in the proceeding. The evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution Is sufficient for warrant of conviction of the appellant. The Court below has not commjtted any illegality or irreguiarity in passing the judgment impugned. 8. Consequentiy, 1 do not find any force in the appeal, same is iiabie to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Soma