Patna High Court
Niranjan Pandit vs The State Of Bihar on 24 June, 2025
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, Ashok Kumar Pandey
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.1318 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2011 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran
======================================================
Niranjan Pandit, Son of Rajdeo Pandit, Resident of Village -Chhithar Tola,
P.S.- Anand Bazar, Distt -Siwan
... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mahendra Prasad Verma, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, Addl. P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 24-06-2025
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the
appellant through the Patna High Court Legal Services
Committee for setting aside the judgment of conviction
(hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned judgment') dated
18.02.2021
and the order of sentence (hereinafter referred to as
the impugned order) dated 26.02.2021 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act,
East Champaran, Motihari in N.D.P.S. Sessions Trial No. 184 of
2011, G.R. No. 840 of 2011, vide C.I.S. No. 155 of 2016 arising
out of Raxaul P.S. Case No. 252 of 2011.
3. By the impugned judgment, the appellant has
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1318 of 2024 dt.24-06-2025
been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)
(ii) (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985 (hereinafter referred to the 'N.D.P.S. Act'). He has been
ordered to undergo a sentence of rigorous imprisonment of 15
years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- (one Lakh). In case of
non-payment of fine, he has been ordered to undergo an
additional simple imprisonment of six months.
4. Mr. Mahendra Prasad Verma, learned counsel
representing the appellant submits that at this stage, the
appellant has served in jail for 13 years and 7 months. Learned
counsel submits that he would confine the challenge in this
appeal to the order of sentence dated 26.02.2021 passed by the
learned trial Court.
5. It is submitted that from the order dated
26.02.2021, it would appear that the learned trial Court has,
while awarding a sentence of 15 years rigorous imprisonment
not considered the various factors which are required to be
looked into for the purpose of coming to a just and proper
conclusion as to what would be an appropriate sentence to the
accused.
6. Learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bachan Singh Vs.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1318 of 2024 dt.24-06-2025
State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 684 wherein the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the principles governing
sentencing of an accused.
7. It is submitted that Section 10(b)(ii)(c) provides
for a minimum sentence of 10 years imprisonment. The 10 years
imprisonment which may extend to 20 years. In the present case,
the appellant has already served 13 years and 7 months.
Therefore, keeping in view the judgment of the Supreme Court
on this issue, the sentence may be reduced for the period
undergone and the appellant may be released.
8. Learned counsel further submits that the learned
trial Court has imposed a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- (one Lakh).
However, the appellant comes from a poor strata of a family
and he was not even able to prefer an appeal against the
impugned judgment for three and half years. The present appeal
has been preferred through the Patna High Court Legal Services
Committee. In such view of the matter, the impugned order may
be modified and the sentence be confined to the period
undergone by the accused.
9. Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State does not object to the
submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1318 of 2024 dt.24-06-2025
10. In the case of Bachan Singh (supra), the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph '206' and '207' has inter
alia observed as under:-
206. Dr Chitale has suggested these mitigating factors:
"Mitigating circumstances.--In the exercise of its
discretion in the above cases, the court shall take into
account the following circumstances:
(1) That the offence was committed under the influence
of extreme mental or emotional disturbance.
(2) The age of the accused. If the accused is young or
old, he shall not be sentenced to death.
(3) The probability that the accused would not commit
criminal acts of violence as would constitute a
continuing threat to society.
(4) The probability that the accused can be reformed and
rehabilitated. The State shall by evidence prove that the
accused does not satisfy the conditions (3) and (4)
above.
(5) That in the facts and circumstances of the case the
accused believed that he was morally justified in
committing the offence.
(6) That the accused acted under the duress or
domination of another person.
(7) That the condition of the accused showed that he was
mentally defective and that the said defect impaired his
capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct."
207. We will do no more than to say that these are
undoubtedly relevant circumstances and must be given
great weight in the determination of sentence...."
11. Having regard to the submissions noted
hereinabove and finding that the impugned order dated
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1318 of 2024 dt.24-06-2025
26.02.2021 passed by the learned trial Court does not consider
the various factors which are required to be looked into for the
purpose of sentencing, we set aside the same and direct that the
period already undergone in incarceration i.e. 13 years and 7
months will be taken as the period of sentence awarded to the
appellant.
12. In result, the appeal is allowed to the extent
indicated hereinabove. The appellant shall be released forthwith
if not wanted in any other case.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/Jagdish/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 27.06.2025
Transmission Date 27.06.2025
