Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 153 (MP)

Shakir alias Gabbar v. State of M. P.

2014-02-03

PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA

body2014
JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 374 of the Cr. P.C. is against the judgment of the trial Court dated 22-2-2011 passed in Special Trial No.14/2008 by the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Indore convicting the appellants for offence under Section 8/20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act (for short 'NDPS Act') and sentenced them for 7 years R.I. each and fine of Rs. 20,000/- each; in default one year's R.I. 2. The prosecution story is that on 23-9-2008 intimation was received that 3 persons were expected to illegally transport the contraband item Ganja. On that information, the appellants along with one more person, were intercepted and during the search it was found that they were carrying Ganja in 3 separate bags weighing 10 kg., 10 kg. and 4 kg. The formalities as prescribed in the Act were completed and the appellants and one more accused person namely Yuvraj was arrested for the alleged offence. The investigation was completed and Challan was filed and they had abjured their guilt and the trial had taken place in which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced, as mentioned above. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the appellants do not wish to challenge the finding of the trial Court in respect of the conviction of the appellants. He has made a prayer for reducing the sentence to the period already undergone, on the ground that the appellants are in custody since 23-9-2008 and they have completed more than 5 years of the sentence. He has also submitted that the appellants have no criminal antecedents and that looking to the nature of the contraband item seized from them and also considering the fact that the quantity seized from them is less than the commercial quantity, they are entitled for the reduction of the sentence. In this regard he has placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in the matter of Madan Singh v. State of M.P. reported in 2011 (2) EFT 563, wherein in the similar circumstances on completion of 4 years & 4 months, the period of sentence was reduced to the period already undergone. He has also placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in the matter of Bheema v. State of M.P. dated 21-3-2013 passed in Criminal Appeal No.405/1998. He has also placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in the matter of Bheema v. State of M.P. dated 21-3-2013 passed in Criminal Appeal No.405/1998. He has also submitted that inspite of the direction of this Court, earlier the final hearing of the appeal could not take place. 4. Counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer. 5. I have perused the impugned judgment and evidence and other material on record. 6. Counsel for the appellants has not challenged the finding of the trial Court convicting the appellants for offence under Section 8/20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act. Even otherwise on perusal of the evidence on record, it is found that the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants for the above offence, accordingly the conviction of the appellants for the above offence is affirmed. 7. This appeal is confined to the issue of sentence alone. The appellants are in custody since 23-9-2008 and they have completed more than 5 years in custody. The submission of the counsel for the appellants that the appellants have no criminal antecedents, has not been disputed by the counsel for the respondent. The contraband item which has been seized from the appellants, is less than the commercial quantity. This Court in the matter of Madan Singh (supra) in a case where 10-11 kg. of Ganja (same contraband item) was recovered, had reduced the sentence to the period of 4 years and 4 months already undergone. 8. Considering the nature of the contraband item, its quantity, the period which is already undergone by the present appellants and the fact that they have no criminal antecedents, I find it to be a fit case for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellants to the period already undergone by them, accordingly their jail sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by them and the fine amount is enhanced from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 40,000/- each. It is further directed that in case of failure to pay the fine amount, the appellants will suffer further simple imprisonment of 3 months each. 9. The appeal is accordingly disposed of and the judgment of the trial Court is affirmed with the above modifications. C.C. as per rules. Order accordingly.