( 1 ) APPELLANT Magan has been convicted under Section 20 (KH) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the Act) and sentenced to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000. 00 in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 21/2 years by the Second Addi. Sessions Judge, Indore, in Sessions Trial No. 151 of 1987, vide judgment dated 19/8/1987. ( 2 ) PROSECUTION case in brief was that on 13/12/1986, around 8. 50 p. m. in Mohanpura, Indore a Sub- Inspector on information received from a informer seized 5 gms and 200 mgs. of CHARAS from the accused appellant who pleaded guilty to the charge and it was on this plea of guilty that the appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated above. ( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the appellant has raised only one point for consideration in this appeal. According to him the Trial Court has not considered the plea of the accused as a whole. According to him the CHARAS seized from his possession was for his personal use and when conviction is based on a plea of guilty the same should not have been split up and it should be read as a whole. ( 4 ) GOING through the record, there is an application for weighing the contraband seized from the appellant but there is no evidence about it. It appears that the same was weighed and was found to be 5 grams and 200 mgs in weight. However, there is no evidence on record to prove the weight. Section 27 (b) of the Act, provides: where the narcotic drug or psychotropic substance possessed or consumed is other than those specified in or under clause (a) with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or with fine or with both. Explanation. (1) - For the purposes of this section small quantity means such quantity as may be specified by the Central Government by Notification in the Official Gazette. ( 5 ) IT was urged by the learned Counsel that in view of the Notification No. S. O. 827 (E) dated November 14, 1985, published in the Gazette of India. Extra Part II, Section 3 (u) dated 14/11/ 1985. ( 5 ) IT was urged by the learned Counsel that in view of the Notification No. S. O. 827 (E) dated November 14, 1985, published in the Gazette of India. Extra Part II, Section 3 (u) dated 14/11/ 1985. it was a small quantity and the punishment should not have been more than six months as provided by Section 27 (b) of the Act. Learned Govt. Advocate submitted that the quantity exceeds by 200 mgs. There is no reliable evidence on record. Even according to the charge-sheet the contraband seized was not weighed and it cannot be said that accurate weight has been given by the prosecution. In the circumstances the quantity can be safely deemed to be a small quantity as defined by Section 27 of the Act and the explanation appended to Section 27 of the Act and the Notification referred to above. ( 6 ) IN the circumstances the sentences as recorded by the Trial Court is liable to be set aside. The accused-appellant is sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment in accordance with Section 27 (b) of the Act. ( 7 ) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant urged that by the time the order of suspension was passed on 8/7/1988, the appellant had completed more than six months and as it is he could not avail of the suspension order passed by this Court and he is still in jail. ( 8 ) THE impugned judgment is dated 19/8/1987 and by now it is more than a year that the appellant had remained in jail. The accused-appellant is therefore ordered to be released forthwith. Appeal partly allowed. .