Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dharmendra Kumar Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:18394
1 CRA-1052-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 22 nd OF APRIL, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1052 of 2025
DHARMENDRA KUMAR PATEL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Aditya Veer Singh - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri C.M.Tiwari - G.A for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. against the
judgment of conviction dated 13.01.2025 passed by the Special Judge (NDPS Act)
District Rewa (M.P.) in SC.NDPS/38/2019, whereby learned Judge found the
appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 8 R/W 20 (B)(ii)(b) of
NDPS Act and directed to suffer R.I. for 4 months with fine of Rs.20,000/- with
default stipulation.
2. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged,
crime was registered against the appellant at Police Station Gurh, District Rewa
for commission of offence punishable under Section 8 R/W 20 (B)(ii)(b) of NDPS
Act. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the
competent Court.
3. After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses and
appreciating the evidence led by parties, learned trial Court found that the
appellant guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sections 8 R/W 20
(B)(ii)(b) of NDPS Act and sentenced him as mentioned above. Being aggrieved
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:18394
2 CRA-1052-2025
with the impugned judgment, the appellant has preferred this criminal appeal
before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant expressly gave up his challenge to the
findings of the Court below so far as the conviction of the appellant is concerned.
In other words, learned counsel for the appellant accepted the finding of
conviction passed against the appellant, however, he challenged the quantum of
punishment alone. It is submitted that he will not involve in such criminal
activities in future. Appellant is in custody since 13.01.2025. He further submitted
that 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 since 2019, jail sentence of appellant may be reduced
suitably.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has submitted that after
appreciating the evidence produced by the prosecution, the Court below have
rightly found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence, therefore, no grounds
are available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellant, hence, he
prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of entire
record of the case, I am inclined to allow this appeal in part upon finding some
force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.
7. Though the appellant has not made any attempt to assail the finding of
his conviction on merits, yet with a view to satisfy myself as to whether the
findings of the Court below of conviction is legally sustainable or not, I perused
the record and especially therein having so perused, I am satisfied that no case is
made out to interfere in the findings of the Court below on merits. From the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:18394
3 CRA-1052-2025
perusal of the record, it reveals that the findings of the trial Court is based upon
proper appreciation of oral and document evidence, therefore, upheld the findings
of conviction under Section 8 R/W 20 (B)(ii)(b) of NDPS Act recorded by the trial
Court.
8. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and
period of jail sentence already undergone by him which is about 3 and a half
month and the appellant was facing trial since 2019, I am of the considered view
that the ends of justice would be met if the appellant is sentenced for the period
already undergone by him with fine amount of Rs.20,000/- which has already
been deposited by him.
9. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned conviction is
hereby maintained. However, the jail sentence imposed on appellant is reduced to
the period already undergone by him. He be released forthwith and if not required
in any other case. Amount of fine, if any, deposited earlier shall be adjusted.
10. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal stands
partly allowed and disposed of .
11. Let a copy of this order along with record be sent to the court below for
information and necessary compliance.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
JUDGE
anu
