JUDGMENT Mr. K.C. Puri, J.:- This is an appeal directed by the accused/appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.01.2004 passed by Shri G. S. Gill, Special Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide which the accused/appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter mentioned as “Act”). 2. The factual matrix of the case is that on 24.10.2002, HC Bhag Singh along with other police officials was on patrolling duty in govt. vehicle bearing registration No. PB-23-B-7503. At about 4.45 PM, when they were proceeding from village Mullanpur towards Fatehpur and were near the cremation ground of Fatehpur, then one person was spotted sitting on the right side of the road. He was sitting on a plastic sheet beneath a Tahli tree besides poppy husk. An empty plastic bag and a plastic container were also lying there. On noticing the police party, the said person tried to flee. He was apprehended on suspicion. One Pargat Singh s/o Hardev Singh was also joined. Upon asking, the said person disclosed his name as Ram Dayal @ Buta. He was asked as to whether he possess any permit or licence for keeping the poppy husk but he failed to produce the same. Two samples weighing 250 gms each were separated and made parcels. On weight, the remaining poppy husk was found to be 10 kgs 500 gms. The remaining poppy husk was put in the same plastic bag and was converted into parcel. The parcels were sealed with seal “DS”. The seal, after use, was handed over to Pargat Singh independent witness. The parcels and the plastic container were taken into possession. From the personal search of accused, currency notes of Rs.90/- were recovered, which were taken in to possession vide separate recovery memo. Investigation was carried out and after completion of investigation, challan against the accused Gian Kaur was presented in Court. 3. On presentation of challan, copies of same were supplied to the accused free of costs as envisaged under Section 207 Cr.P.C. 4.Thereafter, charge under Section 15 of the Act was framed against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 5. 3. On presentation of challan, copies of same were supplied to the accused free of costs as envisaged under Section 207 Cr.P.C. 4.Thereafter, charge under Section 15 of the Act was framed against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 5. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined C. Pawan Kumar as PW-1, MHC Jagdish Singh as PW-2, ASI Devinder Singh as PW-3, Inspector Manjit Singh as PW-4, HC Bhag Singh as PW-5 and thereafter closed the evidence after giving up certain witnesses. 6. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C, wherein all the incriminating evidence was put to him, to which he pleaded innocence and false implication. 7. In defence, he examined HC Labh Singh as DW-1 and closed the evidence. 8. The learned trial court, after appreciating the evidence on record, found the accused guilty for an offence punishable under Section 15 of the Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment and fine, as narrated above. 9. Feeling dissatisfied with the above said judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.01.2004, the accused/ appellant has preferred the present appeal. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant has not challenged the conviction but has submitted that the appellant was only 20 years old at the time of commission of offence. He has further argued that as per custody certificate, he has undergone incarceration for a period of 04 months out of the substantive sentence of one year and he is on bail for the last more than 10 years. It is further submitted that only 11 kgs of poppy husk is stated to have been recovered from the appellant. So, prayer has been made for taking lenient view regarding quantum of sentence. 11. Learned State counsel has supported the judgment passed by the trial court. 12. Although learned counsel for the appellant has not challenged the conviction recorded by the trial court, but since this is the first appeal, I have myself gone through the records of case. The recovery of 11 kgs of poppy husk from the appellant stands proved beyond all reasonable doubts. The recovery was effected in the presence of independent witness. So, there is no reason to interfere with the judgment passed by the trial Court. Consequently, the conviction recorded by the trial court against the appellant, stands confirmed. 13. The recovery of 11 kgs of poppy husk from the appellant stands proved beyond all reasonable doubts. The recovery was effected in the presence of independent witness. So, there is no reason to interfere with the judgment passed by the trial Court. Consequently, the conviction recorded by the trial court against the appellant, stands confirmed. 13. Now reverting to the quantum of sentence, it is submitted that the appellant was 20 years of age at the time of occurrence and he is facing trial for the last about ten years. As per conviction slip, he has undergone incarceration for a period of 04 months out of the substantive sentence of 01 year. He is not a previous convict, nor any other case is pending against him. No useful purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars. 14. Keeping in view whole of the circumstances, the sentence of appellant under Section 15 of the Act, stands reduced to the period already undergone by him. However, the sentence of fine stands affirmed. The amount of fine shall be deposited within three months, failing which, the appellant shall undergo the sentence as awarded in the default clause in respect of payment of fine. 15. A copy of judgment be sent to the trial court for strict compliance. ---------0.B.S.0------------ ------------------