Also Read - MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Three Accused of Providing Equipment for Advertising Religious Conversion

In its reasoning, the court noted that the burden of proving that the substance falls within the defined category rests on the prosecution. The forensic analysis did not detect the presence of tops or resin, and the prosecution did not adduce any additional evidence to bridge this gap. Accordingly, the benefit of doubt was extended to the appellant, leading to the setting aside of the conviction and the sentence imposed thereunder.

The ruling clarifies that mere possession of bhang, without any admixture of the flowering tops or resin, does not attract penal liability under the NDPS Act. Law‑enforcement agencies must therefore ensure that forensic examinations specifically identify whether the seized material contains the prohibited parts of the cannabis plant before initiating proceedings under the Act.

Also Read - MP High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Alleged Journalist in Extortion Case

The decision also underscores the need for precise identification of cannabis derivatives in criminal cases. Where the material consists solely of leaves or seeds, the appropriate legal framework, if any, would be determined by other statutes governing agricultural produce or food items, rather than the NDPS Act.

By affirming that bhang is excluded from the definition of cannabis (hemp) under Section 2(iii), the Jharkhand High Court contributes to the judicial interpretation of the NDPS Act and provides guidance for lower courts and investigating authorities on the scope of the legislation in relation to various cannabis preparations.

Also Read - Department Of Education Cannot Impose Recruitment Restrictions On Aided Minority Schools: Delhi High Court