Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nikku Khan @ Mohammed Deen vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:6120) on 30 January, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:6120]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 48/2025
Nikku Khan @ Mohammed Deen S/o Nawab @ Nawabdeen, Aged
About 50 Years, R/o Ward No. 4, Talwara Ps Talwara Dist.
Hanumangarh. (Lodged In Dist. Jail, Hanumangarh.)
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.S. Gill
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP with
Mr. Omprakash Choudhary
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
30/01/2025
Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under
Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 12.12.2024
passed by learned Special Judge NDPS Act Cases, Hanumangarh
in Sessions Case No.21/2018 by which the learned Judge
convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:-
Offence Sentence Fine & default sentence
Sec. 8/18 NDPS 1 year's RI -----
Act
Sec. 8/21 of 1 Year's R.I Rs.2,000/- and in default of
NDPS Act payment of fine, 3 months' S.I.
Both the sentences were ordered to run consecutively and
the period spent in judicial custody shall be adjusted in the
original imprisonment.
Brief facts of the case are that on 15.03.2018 SHO Shri
Raghuvir Singh Bika, Police Station Talwara alongwith patrolling
[2025:RJ-JD:6120] (2 of 4) [CRLAS-48/2025]
team laid a blockade. During blockade, they found that accused
appellant came on motor cycle bearing registration No.RJ-31-SM-
1738. Upon search, smack and opium were recovered from the
appellant without any valid licence and permit.
The police registered the FIR for offence under Sections 8/18
& 8/21 of NDPS Act and started investigation. After investigation,
the police filed challan against the present appellant. Thereafter,
the charge for offence under Sections 8/18 & 8/21 of NDPS Act
were framed by the trial court against the appellant, who denied
the charges and claimed trial.
During the course of trial, the prosecution examined fourteen
witnesses and also exhibited eighty eight documents. Thereafter,
statement of appellant under section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. In
defence, two witnesses were examined and five documents were
exhibited.
Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide
impugned judgment dated 12.12.2024 convicted and sentenced
the appellant for offence under Sections 8/18 & 8/21 of NDPS Act
as mentioned earlier.
At the threshold, learned counsel for the appellant does not
challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that since
the occurrence relates back to year 2018 and the appellant has so
far suffered a sentence of about twenty three months, out of total
sentence of two years' R.I., therefore, it is prayed that the
substantive sentence awarded to the appellant for the aforesaid
offence may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellant
relied upon judgment of this Court in the case of Mohammad Ali v.
[2025:RJ-JD:6120] (3 of 4) [CRLAS-48/2025]
State of Rajasthan reported in 2013(4) CJ(Cri.) (Raj.) 1914,
Niyamat Ali Nemu v. State of Rajasthan reported in 2013(4)
CJ(Cri.) (Raj.) 1915, Sher Singh vs. State of Rajasthan reported
in 2016(1) WLN 156 (Raj.)
On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.
The learned PP submitted that there is neither any occasion to
interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused appellant nor
any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case.
I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as
defence and the judgment passed by the trial court regarding
conviction of the accused-appellant.
Undisputedly, the incident relates back to the year 2018 and
the appellant has so far undergone a period of twenty three
months incarceration, out of the total sentence of two years' R.I.
so also suffered the mental agony and trauma of protracted trial.
Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the
appellant has remained behind the bars for considerable time, it
will be just and proper if the sentence awarded by the trial court
for offence under Sections 8/18 & 8/21 of NDPS Act is reduced to
the period already undergone by him while maintaining the fine
amount as imposed by the trial court.
Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining
the appellant's conviction and sentence for offence under Sections
8/18 & 8/21 NDPS Act, the sentence awarded to him is reduced to
the period already undergone, however the amount of fine is
hereby waived. The accused-appellant is in custody and shall be
released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
[2025:RJ-JD:6120] (4 of 4) [CRLAS-48/2025]
Application for suspension of sentence is also decided
accordingly.
Pending applications, if any, shall also disposed of.
Record of the case be sent back forthwith.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
C/1-Ishan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
