Shiv Kumar Peshwani @ Shiv Kukreja Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:7680

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRA No. 1346 of 2018

¶6

Shiv Kumar Peshwani @ Shiv Kukreja S/o Ramesh Peshwani @ Jotumal Kukreja Aged About 27 Years (Actual Name Of Appellant In Aadhar Card And Wrongly Mentioned As Shiv Kukreja S/o Jotumal Kukreja In Impugned Order), R/o Gali No.04, Fafadih, Infront Of Prannath Hospital, P.S. - Devendra Nagar Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Appellant

¶8

versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. - Ganj, Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Respondent(s)

¶11

For Appellant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Mishra, Panel Lawyer

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judgment on Board

¶13

11/02/2026

¶14

This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C., 1973 by the appellant against the judgment of conviction

¶15

2

¶16

and order of sentence dated 16.05.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.), in Special Criminal Case (NDPS) No. 267/2017, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as follows:-

¶17

Convicted	Sentenced to
U/s 20(b)(ii)(B) of	R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.
N.D.P.S. Act, 1985	20,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 6 months.

¶18

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 21.07.2017 at 15.10 hrs, Sub- Inspector D.R. Gaikward of Police Station Ganj, Raipur received information from an informer that a tall, thin man of 29-30 years of age was carrying narcotic substance Ganja in a black bag and was sitting near the Yellow Building, in front of Indian Overseas Bank, Bilaspur Road, Raipur and was waiting for the bus. Investigating Officer D.R. Gaikwad summoned witnesses and prepared a whistle-blower report in their presence. A warrant-less search report was prepared, citing the possibility of the accused absconding or destroying evidence. The whistle-blower report was sent to the Superintendent of Police, Kotwali, Raipur, C.G. The Investigating Officer reached the spot and on the basis of information received from an informant, he found the accused Shiv Kukreja alias Lala in front of Indian Overseas Bank on Bilaspur Road, Raipur and served him a notice regarding his search by a magistrate or a gazetted officer. The accused gave his consent to be searched by the Investigating Officer D.R. Gaikward. The in-

¶19

3

¶20

vestigating officer got the accused, police staff and witnesses searched and no suspicious item was found on them. The accused was found carrying a black bag with a pink square strip on the front. Upon searching it, a bundle of khakhi material was found stuck with brown tape, which the accused claimed contained ganja. The said ganja was recovered from the accused. The witnesses identified the Ganja found with the accused as Ganja. An electronic weighing scale was called from Trilochan Sahu and its physical verification was done which was correct. The Ganja found with the accused was weighed which was 9 kg 900 gm Ganja. Two sample packets of 50 gm each were weighed and sealed from the said Ganja. Two samples of 50 gm each of Ganja were seized from the black and white bag and the Ganja kept in it and the remaining 9 k 800 gm of Ganja was seized from the accused. A seal sample panchnama was prepared regarding the sealing of Ganja. The accused was arrested. After the proceedings, the investigating officer returned to the police station and deposited the seized property in the police station’s storeroom. The investigating officer registered the crime and wrote a First Information Report. Witness statements were recorded. A site map of the incident was prepared. The Patwari was also asked to prepare a site map. Information about the serious crime was sent to senior officers. Chemical tests were conducted on the seized sample packets, which were found to contain marijuana. The investigating

¶21

4

¶22

officer completed the investigation and submitted the final report on 18.09.2017 in the trial court.

¶23

The learned Special Judge, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.), after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record vide judgment dated 16.05.2018, convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S. and sentenced him as mentioned in opening paragraph of this order.

¶24

The appellant was in jail from 27.07.2017 to 01.10.2018 ( 1 year 4 months).

¶25

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case and the mandatory provisions have not been followed by the prosecution. The judgment of the Trial Court is bad in law as well as on facts. The learned Trial Court ought not to have convicted and sentenced the appellants and ought to have given the benefit of doubt since the evidence submitted by the prosecution is very shaky and unbelievable. The Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence and documents available on record.

¶26

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and confine his arguments to the sentence part thereof only. Further, he submits that the appellant at present is aged about 35 years and as he is facing criminal trial since 2018 and has already undergone around 1 year and 4 months of jail sentence awarded by the trial Court. There is also no previous criminal antecedents against the appellant. Therefore,

¶27

5

¶28

the jail sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.

¶29

Learned Panel Laywer appearing for the respondent/State, submits that the Trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant, in which no interference is called for.

¶30

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and also went through the records with utmost circumspection.

¶31

From perusal of the records, it transpires that on 21.07.2017 at about 15:10 hours, Sub-Inspector D.R. Gaikwad of Police Station Ganj, Raipur received information that a person was carrying Ganja in a black bag near Indian Overseas Bank, Bilaspur Road, Raipur. After recording the information and informing senior officers, the Investigating Officer proceeded to the spot with witnesses. The accused, Shiv Kukreja alias Lala, was found at the indicated place. He was informed of his right to be searched before a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer, but he consented to be searched by the Investigating Officer. Upon search of his bag, 9 kg 900 gm of Ganja was recovered. Two samples of 50 gm each were drawn and sealed, and the remaining contraband was seized. The accused was arrested, the seized property was deposited in the police station, and an FIR was registered. The samples were sent for chemical examination and were confirmed to be Ganja. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the trial Court on 18.09.2017. After following the due

¶32

6

¶33

processes, the learned Special Judge convicted the appellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years to appellant and fine of Rs. 20,000/- to each appellant. Considering the material available on record and the evidence adduced by the prosecution, I am of the view that the Trial Court did not commit any illegality or infirmity in the findings recorded by Trial Court as regards conviction of the appellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the N.D.P.S.

¶34

Therefore, the essence of the above discussion is that the Investigating Officer in this case appears to have followed all the mandatory and directive provisions of the NDPS Act. There is no concrete reason to disbelieve the evidence of the Investigating Officer and other witnesses and the action taken by them. The accused did not produce any valid license or document in relation to the narcotic substance recovered from his possession. Therefore, it is proved that the appellant possessed 9 kg 900 gm of ganja in violation of the provisions of the NDPS Act.

¶35

As regards the sentence awarded to the appellant. Considering the fact that the appellant is facing criminal trial since 2018, considering the age of the appellant at present and further considering the quantity of contraband seized from the possession of appellant no. 1 i.e. 9 Kg 900 gm contraband(ganja), which is intermediate quantity and there is no previous criminal antecedents against him and further the appellant was in jail from 27.07.2017 to 01.10.2018 ( 1 year 4 months), therefore, this Court is of the opinion that in the

¶36

7

¶37

interest of justice, the sentence imposed upon the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant under Section 20(b)(ii)(B). However, fine imposed by trial Court is maintained.

¶38

With the aforesaid observations, the criminal appeal is allowed in part . The appellant is held guilty of committing offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act and is convicted for the said offence. However, the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him. The appellant is reported to be on bail. Surety and personal bond earlier furnished at the time of suspension of sentence shall remain operative for a period of six months in view of the provisions of Section 437-A Cr.P.C.

¶39

Let a copy of this order and the original records be transmitted to the trial court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

(Arvind Kumar Verma )

¶42

Judge

¶43

Madhurima

Shiv Kumar Peshwani @ Shiv Kukreja v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar Peshwani @ Shiv Kukreja v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Priya Mishra Vs National Testing Agency

Ajay Kumar Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hem Lal and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Harishankar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Prakash Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Tankadhar Paangi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh