Manoj Kumar Garg, J
Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 28.11.2008 passed by learned Special
Judge NDPS Cases, Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.41/2005 by which the learned Judge convicted the appellant for offence under Section
8/15(b) of NDPS Act and sentenced him to undergo one year and six months’ R.I. alongwith a fine of Rs.15,000/- and in default of payment of
fine, to undergo four months’ S.I.
Brief facts of the case are that on 15.09.2005 at about 7.30 P.M. Shri Prithvi Singh, Station House Officer of Police Station Sangaria, received a
secret information about contraband being carried by the accused appellant. Upon this information, he alongwith other Police Officials reached at
Haripura Village, where eight persons were intervened, out of them the accused petitioner viz. Mangal Singh was found with a bag on his shoulder
who was apprehended and then a search was made, the Police recovered total 6 Kg. Poppy husk in a plastic bag and two samples of 500 Grams each
were taken and rest of poppy was sealed in a bag and accused petitioner was arrested.
The police registered the FIR for offence under Section 8/15 NDPS Act and started investigation. After investigation, the police filed challan against
the present appellant. Thereafter, the charge for offence under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act was framed by the trial court against the appellant, who
denied the charges and claimed trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined eight witnesses and also exhibited some documents. Thereafter, statement of appellant under
section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 28.11.2008 convicted and sentenced the appellant for offence under
Section 8/15 of NDPS Act as mentioned earlier.
At the threshold, learned counsel for the appellant does not challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that since the occurrence relates back
to year 2005 and the appellant has so far suffered a sentence of about twenty seven days, out of total sentence of one year and six months’ R.I.,
therefore, it is prayed that the substantive sentence awarded to the appellant for the aforesaid offence may be reduced to the period already
undergone by him. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellant relied upon judgment of this Court in the case of Mohammad Ali v.
State of Rajasthan reported in 2013(4) CJ(Cri.) (Raj.) 1914, Niyamat Ali Nemu v. State of Rajasthan reported in 2013(4) CJ(Cri.) (Raj.) 1915, Sher
Singh vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2016(1) WLN 156 (Raj.)
On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. The learned PP submitted
that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused appellant nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the
said case.
I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as defence and the judgment passed by the trial court regarding conviction of the accused-
appellant.
Undisputedly, the incident relates back to the year 2005 and the appellant has so far undergone a period of about twenty seven days incarceration, out
of the total sentence of one year and six months’ R.I. so also suffered the mental agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-
all circumstances and the fact that the appellant has remained behind the bars for considerable time, it will be just and proper if the sentence awarded
by the trial court for offence under Section 8/15 NDPS Act is reduced to the period already undergone by him while maintaining the fine amount as
imposed by the trial court.
Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining the appellant’s conviction and sentence for offence under Section 8/15 NDPS Act,
the sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone, however the amount of fine is hereby maintained. Four months’ time is
granted to deposit the fine amount before the trial court. In default of payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo one months’ SI. The appellant is
on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds stand discharged.
The record of the trial court be sent back forthwith.
