Chattisgarh High Court
Ajay Kumar Sonwani vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 February, 2025
1
Digitally
2025:CGHC:8719
signed by
SOURABH
SOURABH
NAFR
PATEL
PATEL Date:
2025.02.21
15:59:58
+0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 353 of 2007
• Ajay Kumar Sonwani, Aged about 20 years, S/o Lalsai Sonwani,
R/o Village Mines Colony, Bishrampur, P.S. Bishrampur, District-
Surguja (C.G.).
... Appellant
versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh through-S.H.O. P.S. Bishrampur, District-
Surguja (C.G.).
... Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate.
For Respondent/State : Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal
Judgment on Board
19/02/2025
1 The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 19.04.2007 passed by the
learned Special Judge (Upper Sessions Judge, Ambikapur), District-
Surguja (C.G.), in Special Criminal Case No. 08/2003 whereby the
learned Special Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant as
under :
Conviction Sentence
U/s 21(A) of the Narcotics S.I. for 04 months with fine of Rs.
Drugs and Psychotropic 2,000/-, in default of payment of
Substance Act, 1985. fine amount R.I. for 01 month.
2 The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 02.04.2003, the
Police Officer at Vishrampur Police Station received information
from the secret informant that Ajay Kumar Sonwani was making
small packets of brown sugar in Mines Colony, Vishrampur and
selling them. This information was recorded in the daily diary and
thereafter the police arrived at the spot and there they found the
accused, who was stopped and inquired. A notice under Section 50
of the N.D.P.S. Act was served upon the appellant and a search was
made, on being search twenty-eight small paper packets containing
brown powder weighing 2.210 gram were recovered from the
possession of the present appellant. Thereafter, a case was registered
against the accused under Section 21(A) of the Narcotics Drugs and
Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985.
3 During the course of trial, in order to bring home the offence, the
prosecution has examined as many as 07 witnesses and exhibited 21
documents. The statement of the appellant was also recorded under
Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances
appearing against him and pleaded innocence and false implication
in the case.
4 After hearing the parties, vide impugned judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 19.04.2007, learned trial Court has
convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offence as mentioned
in para-1 of this judgment. Hence, the present appeal.
5 Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that he is not
pressing the appeal so far as it relates to the conviction part of the
judgment and would confine his argument to the sentence part
thereof only. According to him, the incident is said to have taken
place in the year 2003, and thereby about more than 21 years have
rolled by since then. At present, the appellant is aged about more
than 41 years and the appellant has already remained in jail for
about 01 month 24 days, and no useful purpose would be served in
again sending him to jail, therefore, in the interest of justice, it
would be appropriate if the sentence imposed upon him may be
reduced to the period already undergone by him.
6 Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, supporting the
impugned judgment, opposed the arguments advanced on behalf of
the counsel for appellant.
7 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on
record including the impugned judgment.
8 Having gone through the material available on record and the
evidence of the witnesses S.C. Shukla (PW-1), Anand Ram
Lohvanshi (PW-02), Kanhaiya Tiwari (PW-04) and Rajaram (PW-
07), establish the involvement of the accused/appellant in the crime
in question beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, considering the oral and
documentary evidence on record the seizure of brow powder from
the possession of the accused /appellant which was subsequently
found to be brown sugar as per FSL report vide Ex. P-18,19. This
Court does not see any illegality in the findings recorded by the trial
Court as regards conviction of the appellant under Section 21(A) of
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
9 As regards sentence, keeping in view the facts that the incident had
taken place on 02.04.2003 about more than 21 years ago and further
considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also
considering the fact that the appellant has no previous criminal
antecedents and has already remained in jail for about 01 month 24
days, this court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be
served if he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him.
10 In view of the above consideration, I do not feel it appropriate to
send back the appellant to jail. Hence, the appellant is sentenced to
the period already undergone by him i.e., 01 month 24 days instead
of suffering simple imprisonment for 04 months for the offence
punishable under Section 21 (A) of NDPS Act, 1985. However, the
fine amount of Rs. 2000/- with default stipulation imposed upon the
appellant by the trial Court shall remain intact.
11 Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated
above.
12 Appellant is on bail. His bail bonds shall continue for a further
period of 6 months as per requirement of Section 437-A of the
Cr.P.C.
13 Record of the trial Court be sent back along with a copy of this
judgment forthwith for information and necessary action, if any.
Sd/-
(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)
JUDGE
Sourabh P.
