News Citation : 2026 LN (HC) 197 | 2026:CGHC:11759-DB
March 11, 2026 : The Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld the conviction and 15-year prison sentence awarded to four people in a case involving the illegal possession and sale of codeine-based cough syrup in Bilaspur.
A Division Bench of the High Court comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal dismissed three criminal appeals filed by the accused, confirming the judgment of the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Bilaspur. The appeals challenged the trial court’s decision dated January 30, 2025 in Special Sessions (NDPS) Case No.124/2023.
The appellants in the case were Sneha Goyal, Pushpendra Nirmalkar, Amar Jangde and Deva Rajak. They had been convicted under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and sentenced to 15 years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of ₹1.5 lakh each.
According to the prosecution, police from Torwa police station in Bilaspur received a tip-off on September 13, 2023 that a woman wearing a black kurti and red leggings along with three men were carrying intoxicating cough syrup near the Cultural Stage and Yoga Centre in Shobha Vihar, Hemunagar, for illegal sale. Acting on the information, a police team conducted a raid at the location.
During the operation, the police allegedly recovered a total of 175 bottles of cough syrup from the accused. The seizure included 145 bottles of “KOP Free” cough syrup and 30 bottles of “Maxcoff” cough syrup, each bottle containing 100 ml of liquid. The substances were later tested and found to contain codeine and chlorpheniramine, both falling within the scope of the NDPS Act.
The trial court had concluded that the accused were in conscious possession of the contraband and held them guilty under the NDPS Act. Challenging the verdict, the appellants argued before the High Court that there were procedural lapses in the search and seizure process, that independent witnesses had not supported the prosecution case, and that mandatory safeguards under the NDPS Act had not been properly followed.
However, after reviewing the evidence and the legal arguments, the High Court found that the search and seizure were conducted in a public place and therefore fell within the scope of Section 43 of the NDPS Act. The court also held that the recovery was made from bags and a purse carried by the accused, meaning it did not amount to a personal body search requiring compliance with Section 50 of the Act.
The bench observed that the prosecution had successfully established the chain of custody of the seized material and that forensic examination confirmed the presence of narcotic substances. The court also noted that minor inconsistencies in witness statements did not undermine the overall reliability of the prosecution case.
Concluding that the trial court had properly evaluated the evidence, the High Court ruled that there was no reason to interfere with the conviction or sentence.
“All the criminal appeals are dismissed,” the court held, affirming the conviction and directing that the accused continue serving the remaining part of their sentences.
The court also directed the registry to send a copy of the judgment to the concerned jail authorities so that the order can be communicated to the convicts and explained to them in a language they understand.
Case Reference : CRA No. 559 of 2025, Smt. Sneha Goyal vs State of Chhattisgarh; CRA No. 460 of 2025, Pushpendra Nirmalkar and Another vs State of Chhattisgarh; and CRA No. 829 of 2025, Deva Rajak vs State of Chhattisgarh; Counsels: For Appellant (CRA 559/2025) Mr. Akash Singh and Mr. Swapnil Keshari, Advocates; For Appellants (CRA 460/2025) Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate; For Appellant (CRA 829/2025) Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate; For State/Respondent Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Government
