Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhagwat Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 April, 2022
Author: Virender Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHEI JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH
ON THE 8th OF APRIL, 2022
Criminal Appeal No.674/2022
Between :
Bhagwat Patel S/o Amol, Aged
about 35 years, Occupation-
Labourer, R/o Khakaria, P.S.
Paloha, District Narsinghpur
..... Appellant
(By Shri Alok Kumar Gupta, Advocate)
AND
The State of Madhya Pradesh,
Through-P.S. Kotwali Balaghat,
District-Balaghat (M.P.)
...... Respondent
(Shri Prem Narayan Verma, Panel Lawyer)
..................................................................................................................
This Criminal Case coming on for admission this day, the court passed
the following:
JUDGMENT
Being aggrieved vide Judgment and Order dated 08.10.2021 delivered
by Special Judge, NDPS Act, Narsinghpur in Special Case No.01/2016;
whereby, the appellant has been convicted under Section 8/20 NDPS Act and
has been sentenced to undergo R. I. for 1 year and to pay fine of Rs.2000/-
with default stipulation.
2- Prosecution story in brief is that on 22.11.2015 while posted as
Inspector at Police Station Gadarwara, Umesh Tiwari received
information that Bhagwat Patel r/o Khakria is standing at Jamada By-
pass crossing with motorcycle having Ganja in blue bag and was
waiting to sell the same. Following due process, the article (3000 grams
Ganja) was seized from his possession, sample thereof, was taken and
sent to FSL which confirmed that the substance was Ganja. A case was
registered and on completion of investigation, accused was charge-
sheeted. He abjured the guilt and pleaded for trial. After the trial, he has
been convicted and sentence as stated in para 1 above.
3- The ld. Counsel representing the appellant submitted that he does
not want to press the appeal on merits but his limited prayer is that out
of 1 year of sentence, the appellant has already suffered about 8 months
and he is facing trial since 2015. Quantity of Ganja seized from his
possession is not a commercial quantity. It is also submitted that the
appellant has already deposited the fine amount.
4- It is further submitted that at the time of alleged recovery, the
appellant was 28 years old. Now, he is aged about 35 years. He has
responsibility of his entire family. He is the only bread winner of his
family. He belongs to a financially weak family. His family is facing
hardship in his absence due to financial constraints. Therefore, it is
prayed that looking to the circumstances of the case, the sentence
awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already
undergone by him.
5- Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the prayer
and supported the impugned judgment.
6- I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
7- Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the
submissions made by the ld. counsel for the appellant, quantity of
cannabis (Ganja) seized from his possession as well as other facts and
circumstances of the case, it appears that ends of justice would be
served if the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellant is
reduced to the period already undergone by him.
8- In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the appellant is
sentenced to the period already undergone by the appellant. However,
the sentence of fine imposed by the trial Court is modified and
enhanced to Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten Thousand).
9- The appellant is in jail. Subject to payment of fine, he be released
forthwith, in case he is not required to be detained in any other case.
10- The order of the trial Court with regard to the disposal of the
property is affirmed.
11- With the aforesaid, appeal is partly allowed and disposed off.
(Virender Singh)
Judge
Loretta
Digitally signed by MRS. LORETTA
RAJ
Date: 2022.04.12 11:08:51 +05'30'
