ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties finally at this stage with their consent. 4. In the instant case, the appellant herein was charged for offences under Sections 8 and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and was tried and convicted by the Sessions Court for which he was awarded rigorous imprisonment for 12 years and has also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 1,20,000/- with the default clause of further simple imprisonment for two years. The appellant preferred appeal thereagainst before the High Court. The judgment of the High Court reveals that the appellant has argued against the findings recorded by the Sessions Court regarding his conviction and in the alternative he had also made a statement that the imprisonment for 12 years was excessive in nature. After noticing the arguments on both the counts, the impugned order reveals that the High Court confined its discretion only to the second aspect viz. whether the sentence awarded to the accused was excessive and after consideration of this aspect reduced the sentence from 12 years to 10 years rigorous imprisonment. In the process the High Court has not examined the merits of the conviction at all. 5. In these circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and remit the case back to the High Court to decide the appeal afresh and specifically deal with the culpability of the appellant and to decide as to whether the conviction recorded by the Trial Court on this basis was correct or not. Since the appellant has already suffered 7 years incarceration, it would be adviseable to the High Court to decide the appeal at the earliest. 6. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.