Shyam Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 7597 MP

                                                   1
               IN         THE    HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                       AT INDORE
                                            BEFORE
                                HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                        ON THE 9 th OF MAY, 2023
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4589 of 2023

              BETWEEN:-
              SHYAM SINGH S/O BAJESINGH SONDHIYA, AGED
              ABOUT 37 YEARS,
              OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE
              R/O GRAM MAHUKHEDA, THANA DUG,
              DISTT. JHALAWAR (RAJASTHAN)

                                                                                 .....APPELLANT
              (BY SHRI LAVEESH SETHIA - ADVOCATE)

              AND
              THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
              STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
              GANDHI SAGAR, DISTT. MANDSAUR (MADHYA
              PRADESH)

                                                                               .....RESPONDENT
              (BY SMT. VARSHA SINGH THAKUR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                      T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
             following:

                      With the consent of both the parties, appeal is heard finally.
                                                    ORDER

1/ Present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 25.2.2023 passed in S.C. NDPS No.9/217 by Addl. Special Judge (NDPS Act) Bhanpura, District Mandsaur, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the Signature Notoffence Verified under Section 21(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Act (in short “NDPC Actâ€Â) and sentenced to 2 years and 6 Signing time: 10-May-23 11:15:10 AM

months R.I. and fine of Rs.25,000/- with default stipulation.

2/ As per the prosecution story, on 30.5.2006 ASI Jagdish Nimbadwar, P.S. Gandhi Sagar, District Mandsaur got information that appellant/accused Shyam Singh will deliver some illicit contraband to the other person near Navli Phanta. Acting upon the said information, police party reached on the spot and intercepted the accused Shyam Singh and after completion of other formalities and obtaining his consent regarding the search, police searched him and recovered 70 gram smack from his right pocket, which was kept in a green colour polythene. After the sampling process, accused was arrested and offence has been registered against him.

3/ After investigation charge sheet has been filed and trial Court has framed charges under Section 21 of NDPS Act against the appellant. Appellant pleaded ‘not guilty’ in his statements recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and prayed for trial. Prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses, while no witness has been examined in defence. After appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned hereinabove.

4/ Appellant has preferred this appeal on several grounds, but during the course of arguments learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he does not want to press this appeal on merit and assail the finding portion of the impugned judgment. He has confined his argument to the quantum of sentence part only and his prayer is that the imprisonment of the appellant be reduced to the period already undergone, as he has already suffered about more than one year imprisonment and he is facing trial since 2006. It has further been Signature Not Verified submitted that appellant has no criminal record and no other criminal case prior Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Signing time: 10-May-23 11:15:10 AM or after the incident has ever been registered against him, therefore, his jail

sentence be reduced to the period already undergone and the fine imposed by the trial Court may be affirmed.

5/ Per contra, learned GA for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer and prayed for dismissal of this appeal by submitting that the trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant and the sentence in question is sufficient.

6/ Heard learned counsel for both the parties and considered their arguments and perused the record as well as evidence produced by both the parties.

7/ In view of the above submission although conviction has not been challenged, but a perusal of the evidence justifies the judgment passed by the trial Court.

8/ So far as the quantum of sentence is concerned, the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant appears to be just and proper. The appellant has already suffered jail incarceration for a period of more than 1 year (from 5.6.2006 to 23.12.2006 and thereafter he is continuously in custody since 26.9.2022). Appellant has no other criminal antecedents. He is facing trial since 2006, therefore, it would be appropriate to reduce the jail sentence to the period already undergone by the appellant. No minimum sentence was prescribed for the aforesaid offence. Fine amount of Rs.25,000/- imposed by the trial Court is

hereby affirmed.

9/ Consequently, present criminal appeal is partly allowed to the extent as indicated above. Appellant is in custody. On depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited, appellant be released forthwith if he is not Signature Not Verified Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER required in any other case.

Signing time: 10-May-23 11:15:10 AM

10/ Disposal of the property shall be as per the order of the trial Court. 11/ Let a copy of this judgment along with the record of the trial Court be sent back to the concerned trial Court for necessary action.

C.C. as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE trilok

Signature Not Verified Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Signing time: 10-May-23 11:15:10 AM