Madhya Pradesh High Court
Iqbal @ Allarakkha vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:53023
1 CRA-261-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
ON THE 17th OF OCTOBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 261 of 2013
IQBAL @ ALLARAKKHA AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Pushpendra Dubey - Advocate for appellants.
Shri S. P. Chadhar - Government Advocate for respondent/State.
ORDER
This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 has been filed by the appellants assailing the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 05.01.2013 passed in Special Case No.03/2010
passed by the Learned Special Judge ( NDPS Act), Rewa whereby learned
Special Judge found the appellants guilty for commission of offence
punishable under Sections 8(Ga) read with 20(b)(ii)(b) of NDPS Act, 1985
and directed them to suffer R.I. for 5 years each with fine of Rs.15,000/-
each, with default stipulation. Cannabis weighing 8 Kg and 6 Kg was
recovered from the possession of the appellant No.1 & 2 respectively.
2. On perusal of the record it reflects that appellant No.2-Safrool @
Istakharul Haque has been released from the jail on completion of his jail
sentence.
3. Therefore, the arguments are heard for appellant No.1-Iqbal @
Allarakkha only.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:53023
2 CRA-261-2013
4. Relevant facts, briefly stated are that on the basis of report lodged, FIR
was registered. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been
filed before the competent Court. Charges were framed against the
appellant(s)/accused. Accused has refuted the charge and claimed to be tried.
Statements of the witnesses were recorded.
5. After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses and appreciating
the evidence led by the parties; learned Trial Court found the appellant guilty
for commission of aforementioned offence and convicted and sentenced him
as mentioned preceding paragraph No.1. Being aggrieved with the impugned
judgment, the appellants have preferred this criminal appeal before this
Court.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant expressly gave up his challenge to the
findings of the trial Court 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. Appellant has remained in custody for approximately 4 years.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that having regard to all
circumstances, which resulted in appellant's conviction and further keeping in
view the fact that the appellant is facing the trial before the concerned Court since
2010 and this appeal is also pending since 2013, jail sentence of appellant may be
reduced suitably.
7 . Learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that no grounds are
available for reducing the jail sentence awarded to the appellant, hence, he prayed
for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of entire record
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:53023
3 CRA-261-2013
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.
9. On appreciation of the evidence on record, I do not find any infirmity or
illegality in findings of conviction recorded by the Trial Court. Therefore,
findings of appellant No.1-Iqbal @ Allarakkha conviction for the alleged offence
under Section 8(Ga) read with 20(b)(ii)(b) of NDPS Act are upheld.
10. So far as the prayer for reduction in jail sentence is concerned, it
cannot be over looked that appellant is facing the agony since 2013.
Therefore, having taken into consideration all the facts and circumstances
of the case, the custodial period already undergone by the appellant No.1-
Iqbal @ Allarakkha in jail and also the fact that the incident had taken
place in the year 2010 i.e. almost 15 years ago, I am of the view that ends
of justice would meet if jail sentence awarded to the appellant No.1-Iqbal
@ Allarakkha is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Thus, so
far as the jail sentence of the appellant No.1 is concerned, it is modified
and is reduced to the period already undergone by him.
11.Appellant No.1-Iqbal @ Allarakkha is directed to deposit the fine
amount as per the impugned judgment before the Trial Court within a
period of two months from today. The amount of fine, if any, already
deposited be adjusted. However, it is clarified that if the fine amount as
per the impugned order of the trial Court is not deposited within the
stipulated period, the appellant No.1-Iqbal @ Allarakkha would surrender
himself to serve out the entire jail sentence as awarded by the learned
Trial Court with default stipulations.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:53023
4 CRA-261-2013
12. Appellant is on bail, his bail bond shall stands discharged.
13. This appeal is partly allowed and disposed of with the aforesaid
modification in the sentence.
14. A copy of this order along with record of the Trial Court be sent
immediately to the trial Court concerned for information and necessary
action.
15. Certified copy as per rules.
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
L.Raj
