found the petitioners guilty and convicted and sentenced them as stated above. Perusal of records would further reveal that the fine amount of Rs.1,00,000/- imposed on each of the petitioners was not yet paid. As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, though the respondent police at the time of seizing the contraband from the accused persons, taken two samples, they have forwarded only one sample and got chemical analysis report Ex.P.9, but with regard to another sample, there is no chemical analysis report to prove that whether the contraband seized from them is ganja or not. Further, on perusal of the FIR Ex.P.10 and seizure Mahazar Ex.P.6, there is a material contradiction with regard to seizure of the contraband from the accused persons. In the FIR, it is recorded by the respondent police that the contraband has been seized and the accused were arrested at about 11 a.m. on 06.07.2015, but in the seizure mahazar, Ex.P.6, it is mentioned as though the contraband has been seized from the accused persons on 06.07.2015 at 13.00 hours. So this material contradiction has to be considered in detail and requires re-appraisal of factual aspects. In the circumstances, there is arguable point in favour of the petitioners. Further, the Revision is not likely to be taken up in the near future and the petitioners are in judicial custody from 20.09.2022. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the petitioners are entitled to the relief of suspension
