Ajay Kumar Sarthi vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4189 Chatt

                                  1

                                                              NAFR

       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                     CRA No. 243 of 2022
Ajay Kumar Sarthi S/o Shri Visheshar Sarthi aged 25 years, R/o
Adarsh Nagar, Muktiyarmuda PS Kushmunda, Korba, Civil and
Revenue District Korba, CG
                                                      ---- Applicant
                           Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station Kushmunda,
District Korba, CG                       --- Respondent

For applicant - Shri Ajay Mishra, Advocate

For respondent/State - Mrs. Dipti Shukla, PL

Order on Board by Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

04/07/2022

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment

dated 16.1.2020 passed by Special Judge, NDPS, Korba in

Special Criminal (NDPS) case No. 27/2018 convicting the

appellant under Section 20 (b) (ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs

Psychotropic Substances Act and sentencing him to undergo

RI for 04 years and pay fine of Rs. 3000/-, plus default

stipulation.

2. According to the case of prosecution, on 6.9.2018, Vijay

Chelak Inspector of Police Station Kusmunda, Korba, received

an information from informatnt that two persons were

standing near Adarsh Nagar Kusmunda Colony near Chunni

Bazar on a Scooty bearing registration No. CG-12-AT 7027 for

selling contraband article (Ganja). He recorded the above

information in Rojnamcha Sinha and prepared Mukhbir Suchna

Panchnama in presence of the witnesses. He also informed

about this information to the higher officials, thereafter, he

reached the spot along with the witness. In compliance of

Section 50 of the NDPS Act he gave notice to the appellant

and obtained his consent for search. On being searched total

1.650 Kgs of contraband Ganja was found in his possession.

He seized the abve contraband Ganja and prepared two

sample packets of 100 grams each and after completion of

other formalities he returned to the police s tation along with

the seized property and the appellant, then he recorded the

FIR and deposited the seized property in Malkhana.

Thereafter, sample packets were sent for examination to the

FSL. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed

by the police. To robe the appellant in the crime in question,

prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses. In the

statement of the appellant recorded under Section 313 CrPC

the appellant pleaded his innocence and false implication in

the case. However, no defence witness was examined by the

appellant. After conclusion of trial, trial Court convicted and

sentenced the appellant as mentioned in paragraph No.1 of

this judgment. Hence this appeal.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does

not want to press this appeal on merits and confines his

argument to the sentence part thereof only. He further

submits that out of 04 years of jail sentence, the appellant has

already undergone about two years, he has no criminal

antecedent and he is facing the lis since 2018 i.e. for about

two years, and therefore, the jail sentence awarded to the

appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by

him. Counsel for the appellant submits that in the case of co-

accused i.e. Criminal Appeal No. 42 of 2020 (Chain Das v.

State of CG) the co-ordinate Bench has reduced the sentence

to the period already undergone, and therefore, similar relief

may be extended to the appellant herein as well.

4. On the contrary, learned State counsel opposed the

appeal and supported the judgment impugned. She however

does not dispute that the case taken support of and the

present one stand on the similar footing.

5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record

minutely.

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the

case, particularly considering that out of total jail sentence of

four years, the appellant has already remained about two

years in jail, that he is facing the lis since 2018 and that there

is no criminal antecedent against him, this Court is of the

considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if

while upholding the conviction imposed on the appellant, the

jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already

undergone by him.

7. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. Conviction of

the appellant under the aforementioned section is affirmed

and he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him.

The fine sentence is however affirmed.

8. It is reported that the appellant is in jail. He be released

forthwith if not required in any other case.

9. Records of the Court below be sent back along with a

copy of this order forthwith and necessary compliance.

Sd/-

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

Jyotishi