Anil vs Union Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 19042 MP

                                                                                         1
                            IN          THE               HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                AT INDORE
                                                            BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
                                                             ON THE 9 th OF NOVEMBER, 2023
                                                         CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 12929 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          ANIL S/O SHRI RATANLAL PANWAR, AGED ABOUT 46
                          YEAR S , GRAM DALODA, TEHSIL DALODA, DISTT.
                          MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                                                               .....APPELLANT
                          (BY SHRI VIKAS JAIN, ADVOCATE )

                          AND
                          UNION OF INDIA THROUGH NARCOTICS CONTROL
                          BUREAU INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                                                         .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI MANOJ KUMAR SONI, FOR CBN/UOI )
                          ....................................................................................................................................
                                                                      Heard on: 02.11.2023
                                                                    Pronounced on:09.11.2023

                                     This appeal was heard and the court pronounced the following:
                                                                                     JUDGEMENT

This criminal appeal is preferred under section 374 of Cr.P.C. by the

appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 27.09.2023, passed by Special Judge, NDPS Act, Mandsaur, in S.T. No.04/2016, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo 4 years RI with fine of Rs.10,000/-, with default stipulation.

2. The appellant was tried and charged under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. The learned trial Court, after considering the evidence and material available on

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 11/9/2023 4:00:35 PM

record has convicted the appellant, as stated above in para No.1 of this order.

3.The prosecution case in brief is that on 30.03.2016 the contraband article 35 Kg 500 gms. Poppy Straw was recovered from the Shop namely Jai Mata Di Traders on a discreet information.

4. The appellant has preferred this criminal appeal on several grounds but during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant did not press this appeal on merits and not assail the finding part of judgment. He confines his arguments on the point of sentence. Counsel for the appellant assures that the appellant will not involve in such criminal activities in future. He also submitted that the appellant has suffered approximately 01 year and six months custody

period. He further submitted that he is having regard to all circumstances which resulted in appellant's conviction and further keeping in view the fact that the appellant was facing the trial before the concerned Court for more than 08 years, therefore, he prayed that the appeal be partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the appellant be reduced to the period already undergone. Except the aforesaid submissions, counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is an handicapped person by both the legs and even he is not in a position to work his day to day activities. Therefore, this case may kindly be treated as exceptional and looking to the condition of the appellant, his sentence be reduced to the period already undergone.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer.

6. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the record, the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant appears to be just and proper.

7 . However, the learned trial Court has not committed any error in appreciation of evidence available on record. For the said fact relevant Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 11/9/2023 4:00:35 PM

documents are already part of the report. Further, it is found that the Court below considered the evidence available on record and correctly found that the case of the prosecution is well supported by the witnesses and documentary testimony. The procedure was well followed by the prosecution and the witnesses of prosecution have profoundly supported the prosecution case. The Court below has well considered the material available on record, hence, no infirmity is found in the impugned order of conviction passed by the Court below, accordingly, the same is upheld.

8.I have considered the material available on record.

9.The learned Trial Court has passed the order of conviction against the appellant under Section 8/15 of NDPS Act. The order of conviction is not suffered from any infirmity, illegality. Accordingly, the same is up held. So far as, the sentence is concerned, it seems that the appellant has suffered 01 year and 06 months out of 4 years. That part. the appellant has suffered the ordeal of criminal case since 2016. On this aspect, the case of Mangilal Vs. Central Narcotics Bureau 2006 Law Suit (MP)111 is worth referring here wherein the Court has partly allowed the appeal and as the case was related to 2 kg opium i.e. non-commercial quantity, passed a conviction for 3 years RI with fine of Rs. 1000/- instead of 5 years.

10.In view of the aforesaid legal proposition regarding non-commercial

quantity so also considering the fact that there is no criminal record/antecedents of the appellant and he is physically challenged person, therefore, this Court finds it expedient to partly allow this appeal.

11. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the appellant is hereby reduced to the sentence already undergone

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 11/9/2023 4:00:35 PM

with respective fine of Rs. 10,000/- and default stipulation as mandated by learned Trial Court. The bail bond of the appellant shall be discharged after depositing of the fine amount, if not already deposited.

12. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance.

(PREM NARAYAN SINGH) JUDGE amit

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT KUMAR Signing time: 11/9/2023 4:00:35 PM