Madhya Pradesh High Court
Badrilal vs Union Of India ... on 15 March, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
- : 1 :-
CRA Nos. 8/2016, 228/2016,
291/2016 & 344/2016
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA &
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON 15th OF MARCH, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
JAGDISH S/O DEVAJI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, VILLAGE
KANKARIYA TALAI TEH.SINGOLI, NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(SHRI ABHAY SARASWAT, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT.)
AND
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NOT MENTION CENTRAL NARCOTICS
BUREAU,NEEMUCH THRU.HARVINDERSINGH,
INSPECTOR/INVESTIGATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF DEPUTY
NARCOTICS COMMISSIONER, NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI MANOJ KUMAR SONI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENT.)
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 228 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
LABHCHAND S/O NOLA JI, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE KANKARIYA TALAI, P.S. SINGOLI,
DISTT. NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(SHRI ARSHAD AHMED MANSOORI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
APPELLANT.)
AND
UNION OF INDIA CBN THRU. C.B.N. NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
- : 2 :-
CRA Nos. 8/2016, 228/2016,
291/2016 & 344/2016
(SHRI MANOJ KUMAR SONI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENT.)
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 291 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
GHISIBAI W/O BADRILAL, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, VILLAGE -
1. KANKARIYA TALAI, TEHSIL SINGOLI, NEEMUCH, DISTT.
NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH)
SHANKARLAL S/O DULICHAND, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,
2. VILLAGE DABDA KALA TEHSIL SINGOLI NEEMUCH (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(MS. SHRADDHA DIXIT, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS.)
AND
GOVT. OF INDIA CENTRAL NARCOTICS BUREAU NEEMUCH
THROUGH HARVINDERSINGH INSPECTOR / INVESTIGATION
OFFICER OFFICE OF DEPUTY NARCOTICS COMMISSSIONER,
NEEMUCH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI MANOJ KUMAR SONI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENT.)
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 344 of 2016
BETWEEN:-
BADRILAL S/O DEVILAL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE KANKARIYA TALAI, P.S.SINGOLI
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(SHRI ABHAY SARASWAT, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT.)
AND
UNION OF INDIA THRU.C.B.N.NEEMUCH NOT MENTION NEEMUCH
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI MANOJ KUMAR SONI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENT.)
- : 3 :-
CRA Nos. 8/2016, 228/2016,
291/2016 & 344/2016
These appeals having been heard and reserved for judgment,
coming on for pronouncement this day, Hon'ble JUSTICE SHRI
VIVEK RUSIA pronounced the following :
JUDGMENT
All the aforesaid four appeals arise out of the judgment dated
8.12.2015 passed by Special Judge, NDPS Act, Neemuch in Special
Case No.46/2012 whereby all the appellants stand convicted u/s. 8
read with Section 18(b) of the Narcotic Drug Psychotropic Substances
(NDPS) Act and sentenced to undergo 14-14 years' RI and to pay fine
of Rs.1,50,000/- - 1,50,000/- respectively and in default of payment of
fine amount, to further undergo 1 year 6 months RI.
1. The prosecution story, in short, is that on 29.6.2012 Ashish
Bhatnagar posted as Sub Inspector in Central Narcotics Bureau,
Neemuch, received discrete information that Badrilal, Jagdish and
Radheshyam along with others would be proceeding in the next
morning from Village Kankriyatalai to Begu to deliver 60-70 Kg. of
opium to some person of Rajasthan or Punjab and if they are
apprehended, a large quantity of opium could be recovered. On
receipt of such information, Panchnama was drawn and the said
information was sent to the Superintendent, Dy. Narcotics
Commissioner. A team headed by Ashish Bhatnagar, Sub Inspector
was constituted and reached Hanuman temple, Ratangarh by a Govt.
vehicle at 4.30 am. At 5.30 am., they saw three motorcycles coming
from the way of Village Kankriyatalai. They were stopped by the
poilice force . The pillion rider of Pulser motorcycle who was carrying
a bag threw the same and fled away. The driver of the said motorcycle
- : 4 :-
CRA Nos. 8/2016, 228/2016,
291/2016 & 344/2016
bearing Registration No. RJ-09-SL-3335 disclosed his name as
Labhchand and the name of the person who fled away as
Radheshyam. Lalchand was searched after complying with the
provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act and from his possession, 20
Kg. of opium was recovered. Thereafter, driver of the second
motorcycle, which was without a plate number, disclosed his name as
Badrilal and the name of pillion rider as Gheesi Bai and from their
joint possession 25 Kg. of opium was recovered. The third motorcycle
bearing Registration No. MP-44-MF-3411 was searched. The driver of
the said motorcycle disclosed his name as Shanker and the name of
the pillion rider as Jagdish. From their possession, 20 Kg. of opium
was recovered. After the completion of the investigation, a charge
sheet was filed against all 5 accused. Charges u/s. 8 read with Section
18(b) and in the alternative charges u/s. 8 read with Section 29 and
18(b) of the NDPS Act was framed. All the appellants denied he
charges and pleaded for trial. In order to prove the charges against the
appellants, the prosecution examined 7 witnesses and got exhibited 53
documents as Exh. P/1 to P/53. In defence, the appellants examined
only one witness - Sualal as D.W.1. After evaluating the evidence that
came on record, learned Special Judge has convicted and sentenced all
the appellants, as stated above. Hence, the present appeals before this
Court.
2. At the very outset, learned counsels appearing for all the
appellants jointly submit that they are not assailing the conviction
awarded to the appellants and the same may be upheld, but they are
praying for a reduction of the sentence from 14 years to the period
already undergone. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that all
- : 5 :-
CRA Nos. 8/2016, 228/2016,
291/2016 & 344/2016
the appellants are the first offender and they are in jail since the date
of their arrest. They committed the offence in the greed of some
money and they are not a habitual offender. They have already
undergone more than 11 years of the jail sentence. There is no adverse
complaint about their conduct in jail, therefore, their jail sentence be
reduced from 14 years, which is on the higher side, to the period
already undergone. Their default sentence be also reduced from 1 year
& 6 months to 6 months. In support of their contention, they placed
reliance on the judgment of the apex Court in the case of Jeet Ram
V/s. The Narcotics Control Bureau, Chandigarh : 2020 Cr.L.R. (SC)
966.
3. On the other hand, Shri Soni learned counsel appearing for the
respondent opposes the prayer by submitting that the appellants were
found with a large quantity of contraband. The maximum sentence for
the said offence is 20 years, but they have been sentenced only for 14
years, therefore, no case for reduction of sentence is made out.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we have
perused the record of the court below.
Appreciations & Conclusion
4. The Division Bench of this court in Cr. Appeal No.7745/2018
decided on 12.3.2021, in Para 6 to Para 12 of the judgment has
observed below:-
"06. The appellant is already in custody. No criminal
antecedents of similar nature of appellant were pointed out to
this Court. In Shahejadkhan Mahebukhan Pathan v/s The
State of Gujarat reported in JT 2012 (10) SC 8, the Apex
Court reduced the sentence from 15 years to 10 years wherein
the appellant therein, was found carrying 500 gm of brown
sugar. The sentence was reduced because the appellant therein
was a first time offender. Same is the case here.
- : 6 :-
CRA Nos. 8/2016, 228/2016,
291/2016 & 344/2016
08. Similarly, in Jeet Ram v/s the Narcotics Central Bureau,
Chandigarh passed in Criminal Appeal No.688/2013 decided
on 15.09.2020, 13 kg of charas was recovered from the
appellant therein and the Court reduced the sentence from 15
years to 10 years.
09. This Court in Hokamchand Meena @ Bhuralal v/s The
State of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.210/2007
decided on 29.10.2015 reduced the sentence from 12 years to
10 years in a case where 540 gm of brown sugar was seized
from the possession of appellant therein.
10. In a recent case i.e., Criminal Appeal No.1776/2016
(Rakesh v/s The State of Madhya Pradesh) decided on
25.02.2021, the Court reduced the sentence from 11 years to 10
years which is minimum prescribed sentence under the said
provision of N.D.P.S. Act. Pertinently, in the said case, 4 kg
500 gm of opium was found to be in possession of appellant
therein.
11. Considering the aforesaid, we deem it proper to reduce the
jail sentence of appellant from 12 years' rigorous imprisonment
to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment. It is further directed that
the period of imprisonment in jail in default of payment of
Rs.1,50,000/- shall stand reduced to six months.
12. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed to the extent
indicated above."
5. In the present case also, the appellants are the first offender.
They were found in possession of 20-20 Kg. of opium. They are in
jail since the date of their arrest. In the case of Jeet Ram (supra), the
apex Court has reduced the jail sentence from 15 years to 10 years. In
our considered opinion, the jail sentence awarded to the appellants is
on the higher side and the same deserves to be reduced.
6. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the
appellants is hereby affirmed, but the jail sentence awarded to the
appellants is reduced from 14 years to 12 years. The default sentence
awarded to the appellants is also reduced from 1 year 6 months to a
period of 6 months respectively.
- : 7 :-
CRA Nos. 8/2016, 228/2016,
291/2016 & 344/2016
With the aforesaid, this appeal stands partly allowed to the
extent indicated above. Let a photocopy of this order be retained in the
file of each connected appeal.
[VIVEK RUSIA] [ANIL VERMA]
JUDGE. JUDGE.
Alok/-
Digitally signed by ALOK GARGAV
Date: 2023.03.20 16:50:27 +05'30'
