JUDGMENT : M.G. GIRATKAR, J. 1. Appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'accused') assailed the judgment of conviction passed by 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha in Special Case No. 14/2006 by which accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(i)(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as 'N.D.P.S. Act') and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days. 2. The case of the prosecution in short against the appellant is as under :- (i) On 5-5-2006, API Shri Bahadure registered the crime on the report of SDPO Shri Empalliwar. On 5-5-2006, SDPO Shri Empalliwar of Arvi Division received secrete information that accused used to sell ganja in his hotel/dhaba near Highway No. 6 within the jurisdiction of Karanja Police Station. He got the entry in the station diary. He called two panchas and thereafter he proceeded to dhaba of accused along with police staff, two panchas, photographer, measurement instruments etc. They reached there at about 5.00 p.m. Accused was present in the hotel. He gave him a notice of their introduction. He started search of the hotel. He found one jarman box in front of the accused on a cot. They opened it and found 24 small pockets containing ganja. They got it confirmed by taking smell. There were also some currency notes of Rs. 7465/-. In the presence of panchas, photographer taken the photos. Ganja was measured in presence of panchas. It was found 700 gms. Thereafter they brought the accused to Police Station and registered the crime. Sample was taken out and sent to Chemical Analyser. As per the Chemical Analyser report, samples were found to be ganja. After complete investigation, police filed charge-sheet before the Special Court. (ii) Charge was framed at Exhibit 19. Same was readover and explained to the accused. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Prosecution has examined 7 witnesses. Statement of accused was recorded. After hearing the prosecution and defence, learned trial Court convicted the accused as stated above, hence, the present appeal. 3. Heard learned Counsel Shri Sable for the appellant/ accused. He has submitted that in the FIR, only green leaves were mentioned. There is nothing to show that it was ganja. He has pointed out that panch witnesses were not impartial. After hearing the prosecution and defence, learned trial Court convicted the accused as stated above, hence, the present appeal. 3. Heard learned Counsel Shri Sable for the appellant/ accused. He has submitted that in the FIR, only green leaves were mentioned. There is nothing to show that it was ganja. He has pointed out that panch witnesses were not impartial. They were panch witnesses of police. Independent witnesses not examined. Prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of accused, hence, accused/appellant is entitled for acquittal. 4. Heard Shri Mirza, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State/respondent. He has submitted that evidence of Investigating Officer is well corroborated by panch witnesses. Photographer has stated in his evidence that he had taken photographs of the place where ganja box was found. Chemical Analyser report, Exhibit 22 shows that sample which was sent was found to be ganja. Learned trial Court has rightly convicted the accused, hence, appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. During the course of argument, learned counsel Shri Sable has pointed out Section 20(b)(i)(A) of the N.D.P.S. Act and submitted that accused was tried for small quantity of ganja and punishment is only to the extent of one year or with fine, therefore, he prayed to take a lenient view. 6. Evidence of SDPO Shri Empalliwar is well corroborated by the panch witnesses. Chemical Analyser report, Exhibit 22 shows that sample which was sent was of ganja. There is no doubt that accused was possessing and selling small quantity of ganja. Hence, impugned judgment of trial Court is well reasoned. Appellant is aged about 68 years and facing prosecution since 2006, therefore, following order meets the ends of justice. ORDER (i) The appeal is partly allowed. (ii) Conviction for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(i)(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act is maintained, however, punishment is modified as under : "Accused is convicted for the period already undergone (16 days)". Rest of the part of the impugned judgment is maintained as it is. (iii) R & P be sent back to the trial Court.