Madhya Pradesh High Court
Golu @ Nitin Soni vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 July, 2025
Author: Achal Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Achal Kumar Paliwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:31738
1 CRA-9329-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 15th OF JULY, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 9329 of 2022
GOLU @ NITIN SONI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Abhay Gupta - Advocate for the appellant.
Ms.Shikha Singh Baghel- P.L. for the State.
ORDER
This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374
(2) of the Cr.P.C. against the judgement dated 13.9.2022 passed by Special
Judge, NDPS Act, Narsinghpur in Special Case No.43/2021 (State Vs. Golu
@ Nitin Soni), whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 8/21(b)
of NDPS Act and sentenced to RI for four years with fine of Rs.4,000/-, with
default stipulations.
2.Prosecution story, in brief, is that at alleged time, date and place,
appellant was found in possession of 22 gram smack (heroin) without any
license.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not challenging
conviction part of the judgment. He is challenging sentence part of the
judgment. It is urged that appellant is in jail since 26.7.2021. Thus, he has
served sentence of almost four years. Therefore, appellant may be sentenced
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:31738
2 CRA-9329-2022
with the period already undergone by him and fine imposed by the trial
Court.
4.Learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that prosecution
has proved its case by leading cogent evidence and has proved guilty of the
appellant beyond reasonable doubt and there are no grounds to interfere with
the same. Learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the
appellant, as above, hence, appeal is liable to be dismissed.
5. Heard and perused the record of the case.
Analysis and findings:-
6. So far as appellant's conviction under Section 8/21(b) of NDPS Act
is concerned, from the testimony of Preetamlal (PW-1), Richa Karauv (PW-
2), Ranjeet Singh (PW-3), Rakesh (PW-6), Shivraj Singh (PW-7), Abhishek
Jain (PW-9) and documents Ex.P-1 to P-50, it is clearly established that at
alleged time, date and place, appellant was found in possession of 22 gram
smack (heroin) without any license.
7. In view of the evidence available on record, learned trial Court has
rightly convicted appellant for offence under Section 8/21(b) of NDPS.
Hence, no interference is called for in same.
8. So far as sentence is concerned, learned trial Court has sentenced
the appellant under Section 8/21(b) of NDPS Act with RI for four years with
fine of Rs.4,000/- and there are no criminal antecedents of the appellant.
Appellant is in jail since 26.7.2021 and no minimum sentence is prescribed
for offence under Section 8/21(b) of NDPS Act. Hence, ends of justice
would be served, if the appellant is sentenced with the period already
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:31738
3 CRA-9329-2022
undergone by him and with fine imposed by the trial Court.
9.Resultantly, this criminal appeal is partly allowed and the appellant is
sentenced under Section 8/21(b) of NDPS Act with period already
undergone by him and with fine as imposed by the trial Court.
1 0 . Accordingly, this criminal appeal stands partly allowed and
disposed off.
11.At present appellant is in jail, hence it is directed that present
appellant be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
12.A copy of this judgment be sent to concerned jail and trial Court for
information and necessary compliance.
13.Record of the trial Court be sent back.
(ACHAL KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
Ansari
