State challenged a discharge order where recovered substance was found to be Bhang, which does not attract penal consequences under the NDPS Act. The High Court agreed with the discharge and dismissed the time-barred revision petition along with the condonation-of-delay application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
S. No. 74 Regular Cause List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
Crl R No. 34/2024
UT of J&K Through P/S Anantnag
…Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Illyas Nazir Laway, GA
Vs.
Ashiq Hussain Sheikh
...Respondent(s)
Through: None
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE
O R D E R 17.11.2025
Crl R. No. 34/2024:
“Accused present FSL report submitted by the prosecution alongwith the challan reveals that seized material 7 kgs and 500 grams from the accused was Bhang. In view of Judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Punja and Haryana in case Gardial Singh vs State of Punjab, 2002 (3), Cr.CC 296 and of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in case Amr Nath Gupta vs State of U.P 2005 (3) ACR, 2470 and also in case Samid vs State of U.P 1995 (ALJ) 1108 recovery of Bhang does not constitute any offence under NDPS Act.
In view of the above discussion when Bhang is not covered in any offence of NDPS Act, the accused as such is discharged. He stands released from his bail bonds. The file after due completion be consigned to records.”
petitions that unnecessarily burden the judicial system and result in avoidable wastage of the Court’s valuable time.
(VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL) JUDGE
SRINAGAR 17.11.2025 Shabroz
2 issues framed by the court
Whether possession of Bhang constitutes an offence under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act.
Whether the Sessions Court's discharge of the accused should be set aside despite the petition being time barred.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gurdial Singh v. State of PunjabFollowed¶7
Gurdial Singh v. State of Punjab, 2002 (3) Cr.CC 296
Amr Nath Gupta v. State of U.P.Followed¶7
Amr Nath Gupta v. State of U.P., 2005 (3) ACR 2470
Samid v. State of U.P.Followed¶7
Samid v. State of U.P., 1995 (ALJ) 1108
1 provisions across 1 enactments
UT of J&K Through P/S Anantnag
Ashiq Hussain Sheikh
Vinod Chatterji Koul
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
