The Jharkhand High Court (Ranchi Bench) has clarified that while Ganja and Charas are included within the definition of “cannabis (Hemp)” under Section 2(iii) of the NDPS Act, Bhang is specifically excluded from the said definition. Since the FSL report conclusively established that the seized substance was Bhang, and not Ganja, and since the case involved no allegation of cultivation of a cannabis plant (which alone is punishable under Section 20(a) read with Sub-Clause (b)(i) of the NDPS Act), the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Sections 22(B), 20(B), and 11(B) of the NDPS Act was held to be absolutely illegal and not justified under law. The Court therefore set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant, and acquitted Sunil Kumar Singh of all charges.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava noted that singular and decisive turning point in this case was the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) Report which specifically opined that the seized substance, the ‘broken leaves of vegetable flowery substances’, was “Bhang”, not Ganja. The appellant’s counsel argued that Bhang is expressly excluded from the ambit of the NDPS Act and therefore the conviction was wholly illegal.
The Bench examined Section 2(iii) of the NDPS Act, which defines “cannabis (hemp)” to include (a) charas, (b) ganja (the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plant, excluding seeds and leaves when not accompanied by the tops), and (c) any mixture of the above forms. The Bench noted that there was no scientific evidence to establish that Bhang is prepared from either charas or ganja or ganja leaves.
The Bench further observed that ganja leaves and seeds are explicitly excluded from the definition of ganja under the Act, and that Bhang is nowhere referred to as a prohibited drink or prohibited drug under the NDPS Act. Crucially, the State Government had also not framed any rules under the NDPS Act nor issued any notification designating Bhang as a prohibitory drug. The Bench therefore reiterated that Bhang does not fall within the definition of cannabis (Hemp) under Section 2(iii) of the NDPS Act.
Briefly, in the early hours of 17th October 2000, a police patrolling party led by S.I. Arvind Kumar was returning to Baghbera Police Station when they spotted a man carrying a heavy VIP briefcase near the Chaibasa Bus Stand. The man attempted to flee upon being signalled to stop but was apprehended. A search conducted in the presence of witnesses and a Gazetted Officer, Prabir Kumar Bandopadhyay, led to the recovery of 12 polythene packs of what was believed to be Ganja, weighing approximately 11 kg, from the accused’s possession. A case was registered against the appellant, Sunil Kumar Singh, under Sections 20 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). After trial, the Special Judge-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge, convicted the appellant under Sections 22(B), 20(B), and 11(B) of the NDPS Act and sentenced him to 7 years Rigorous Imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 50,000/-.
