Madhya Pradesh High Court
Munna Tarzan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:53132
1 CRA-1384-2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
ON THE 17 th OF OCTOBER, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1384 of 2009
MUNNA TARZAN
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri N.K. Tiwari, counsel for appellant.
Shri Pankaj Raj, PL for respondent.
ORDER
This appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C. r/w Section
415 of B.N.S.S. against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
30.06.2009 passed in Special Case No. 36/2007 by Special Judge (NDPS) Bhopal
whereby learned Judge has held the appellant guilty of the offence punishable
under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(B) 2(B) of NDPS Act and sentenced him
to undergo R.I. for 8 months and fine of Rs.5000/- in default of payment of fine
appellant to undergo RI for two months.
2. As per the prosecution story, on a tip received from an informant, the
police party intercepted the appellant and 1.4 kg cannabis was recovered from the
possession of the appellant. After following the due process, an offence was
registered against the appellant at Crime No.328/2007, Police Station Ashoka
Garden District Bhopal under Section 8/20 NDPS Act. After completion of
investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court.
3. After recording the statements of prosecution witnesses and appreciating
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:53132
2 CRA-1384-2009
the evidence led by parties, learned trial Court found the appellant guilty for
commission of offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(B) 2(B)
of NDPS Act and sentenced him as mentioned above. Being aggrieved by the
impugned judgment, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does
not want to challenge the conviction of the appellant recorded under Section 8(c)
read with Section 20(B) 2(B) of NDPS Act by the Trial Court, but has prayed for
reduction of jail sentence. It is submitted that the incident had taken place in the
year 2007 i.e. almost 18 years ago. It is also submitted that the appellant has
already served out about 148 days incarceration so far. In view of the above, it is
prayed that appellant's jail sentence may be reduced/modified to the extent of
period already undergone by him as no fruitful purpose would get served by
sending him behind the bars again.
5. Learned counsel for the State has supported the findings recorded by
the Trial Court and has submitted that after appreciating the evidence adduced by
the prosecution, the Trial Court has rightly found the appellant guilty for the
aforesaid offence and therefore prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
7. 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.
9. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and the
period of jail sentence already undergone by the appellant which is of about 148
days and that the appellant was facing trial since 2007, I am of the considered view
that the ends of justice would be met if the appellant is sentenced for the period
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:53132
3 CRA-1384-2009
already undergone by him by enhancing the fine amount.
10. 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 and the fine of Rs.5000/- as imposed upon
the appellant is enhanced to Rs.10,000/- which shall be deposited before the Trial
Court within a period of two months. The fine amount already deposited by the
appellant be adjusted. In default of payment of fine amount within the stipulated
period, the appellant shall suffer the jail sentence as awarded by the trial Court in
default of payment of fine. Appellant is on bail. His bail bond is discharged.
11. With the aforesaid modification, the present criminal appeal stands
partly allowed and disposed of.
12. 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.
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
SM
