The appellants, Sahid K and others, were convicted under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act for possessing 3 kg of ganja. They challenged the conviction, arguing that the prosecution's case was flawed due to inconsistencies in the evidence and the failure to seize the vehicle from which the contraband was recovered. The court considered the contentions and found that the evidence of the detecting officer and other witnesses was consistent and reliable. The court also addressed the issue of the weight difference in the samples sent for chemical analysis and the applicability of Section 35 of the NDPS Act.