JUDGMENT 1. - In this appeal, accused-appellant Kala Singh @ Jaspal Singh has not challenged his conviction on merits, who has been convicted and sentenced by the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act Cases), Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No. 18/2008 as under: Section 8 read with : 4 Years R.I. with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in Section 15(b) of the default of payment of fine, 1 years R.I. N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 additionally. 2. Application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389, Cr.P.C. by accused Kala Singh @ Jaspal Singh was first dismissed on 18.12.2010 and then on 5.8.2011 and on 27.11.2012. 3. Now the appellant has simpliciter prayed that his conviction under Section 8 read with Section 15(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 (for short the Act of 1985 hereinafter) be maintained but he may be released on undergone sentence because as per him, he has remained in custody in this case from 29.3.2008 to 28.5.2008 and then from 26.8.2010 till today, i.e. up to 10.4.2013. In support of his prayer, he has placed reliance on Ghasita Saliu v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2008) 3 SCC 52 . 4. 1 have heard both the parties and perused the judgment of the learned lower Court. I have also perused the record of the case and particularly I have gone through the statements of PW-1 Chunni Singh, PW-2 Devpal, PW-3 Jagdcv Singh, PW-4 Dharmveer, PW-5 Nav Ratan, PW-6 Mahaveer Singh, PW-7 Balkaran Singh, PW-8 Nihal Chand, PW-9 Subhash, PW-10 Sohan Lal, PW-11 Kalu Ram and PW-12 Bhoma Ram. 5. From the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and after looking at the evidence produced by the accused-appellant in the case, it is proved beyond doubt that on 29.3.2008 accused-appellant Kala Singh was found in illicit possession of 2½ kgs. of Poppy Husk and he was having no licence to possess it. Thus, he has been rightly found guilty under Section 8/ 15(b) of the Act of 1985 for illicit possession of medium quantity of Poppy Husk in the aforesaid manner at 6.15 P.M. near Bhimrao Ambedkar Park, Ward No. 11 at Raisinghnagar. 6. The accused-appellant Kala Singh is said to be first offender and it has also been stated on behalf of the appellant that no other criminal case is pending against him. The learned Public Prosecutor has not submitted any criminal record against him except the present one. 6. The accused-appellant Kala Singh is said to be first offender and it has also been stated on behalf of the appellant that no other criminal case is pending against him. The learned Public Prosecutor has not submitted any criminal record against him except the present one. So in the circumstances of the case, it will be in the fitness of things if the accused Kala Singh @ Jaspal Singh be released on undergone sentence. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby partly allowed and it is hereby ordered that the conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 8/15(b) of the Act of 1985 be maintained but his sentence is reduced to the sentence already undergone by him and he be set at liberty if not required in any other case.Appeal disposed of. *******