JUDGMENT Mr. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) - Present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14th March, 2000 passed by the Court of Special Judge, Nawanshahar, whereby the appellant was held guilty of an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1.00 lac, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. 2. Case of the prosecution is that the appellant was found in possession of six bags each containing 38 kg of poppy husk. 3. Briefly stated, on 15th May, 1997, a police party headed by ASI Balwinder Singh was going from village Alachaur to Chuharpur for apprehension of criminals and detection of crime. The police party was traveling in a private vehicle, TATA 407 and it found the appellant sitting on a stack of bags on the side of fields of sunflower plants. Seeing the police party, the accused made an attempt to conceal himself, however, he was apprehended. An offer was made to the accused to get himself searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. He reposed full faith in the police party and a consent memo Ex.PD to this effect was prepared. 4. This Court need not to go into the details of evidence, as the counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has very fairly stated that the appellant has already completed ten years of his sentence but is languishing behind the bars only because he has not been able to pay the fine. Therefore, the learned counsel has contended that he will not challenge the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant, but will only pray to this Court that the sentence of default clause, i.e. two years rigorous imprisonment for non-payment of the fine, be adequately reduced. Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon’ble the Apex Court rendered in ‘Shanti Lal v. State of M.P.’ [2007(4) Law Herald (SC) 3172] : 2007 (4) RCR (Criminal) 563 to say that awarding of sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of a fine is harsh. Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon’ble the Apex Court rendered in ‘Shanti Lal v. State of M.P.’ [2007(4) Law Herald (SC) 3172] : 2007 (4) RCR (Criminal) 563 to say that awarding of sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of a fine is harsh. In Shanti Lal’s case (supra), considering the fact that the appellant was a poor man, who was unable to pay the fine and was not habitual in dealing with the narcotic trade being the first offender, sentence in default of payment of fine was reduced to six months. 5. Accordingly, the alternative prayer made by counsel for the appellant is accepted and the sentence awarded to the appellant in default of payment of fine is reduced from two years to six months rigorous imprisonment. Hence, the conviction and the substantive sentence awarded to the appellant is maintained, however, the default clause is modified. It is ordered that the appellant shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and shall pay a fine of Rs.1.00 lac for an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Act and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. 6. With the modifications made above, present appeal is disposed of. ————0.B.S.0————