HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURV ‘ Sungle Bench Hon’ble Shn T P Sharma, Judg Criminal Apgeal No.261 of 2008 Balihar Singh,‘ S/o Shri r Dhaneshwat Wardon aged 40' yéars resudent of Vlllage Jangudeeh P S Nawal.hat District Gajapattl (Onssa) Vel’SUS' State of Chhattlsgarh through the Police Station Torwa Dustnct Bilasur (CG) Criminal Aggeal under Section 374 of the Code of Cnmmal - Procedure 1 973 resent : Shn Shrawan Chandei counsel for the appellant Shn Bhaskar Payasr Panel Lawyer for the State AopeHant Jail ' 1 , Respondent ‘ ORAL ORDER v (Passed on 26m day of June, 2008) Heard on lANo 3/2008 which Is an appllcatron for '- condonatlon of delay m fling this appeal (2) This‘ criminal appeal is barred by_ 527 days and the appellant y has mentioned the grounds in his application for condoning the delay ‘ - of 527 days that he Is not conversant about the limitation period in ling appeal due to which delay has been caused 3) Taking into conSideration the grounds mentioned in the 7 application the application (l A No 3/2008) is allowed and the delay . h of 527 days in fling this appeal is condoned. (4) Heardvon admission. . (5) The appeal is admitted for consideration. VI 6) Leamed counsel for the appellant seeks permission of this ‘ Court to withdraw applications ie (l IA No 1/2008) for suspension of. sentence and grant of bail and (l A No 2/2008) for exemption from _ ayment of fne amount ‘ @ m p P f ( ( p (7) The applications (IANo 1/2008 and l.A.No.2/2008) are dasmussed as Withdrawn (8) With the consent of learned counse! for both the parties, this appeal Was heard t'lnaHy. (9) t This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed _by the Special Jude (N.D.P.S. Act, 1985) & Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Special Case No.12/2005 whereby the learned Special Judge has convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 20 (B) 2 (b) of the N D P S Act 1985 and sentenced him to undergo Rl for 3 years and fine of Rs 5 OOOI- In default of payment of tine to undergo additlonal R l for 6 months. -10) During the course of arguments learned counsel for the appellant submits that he wants to argue only on the question of sentence and he has not disputing the conwction (1 1) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is ‘ in custody since 22-03-2005 and he has completed the jail sentence awarded bythe learned Special Judge and presently, he is in custody for non-payment of fine amount. lt was argued on behalf of the ~ appellant that the appellant is a poor person and not in a position to deposit the fine amount. (12) lt‘is also submitted that after completing the. substantive sentence of imprisonment he is in jail for non-payment of fine and completed 3 months and 3 days of imprisonment. He is required to remain in custody for 2 months and 27 days. Three months and three days imprisonment fornon-payment of hne would be sufficient. ,(13) The appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 20(8) 2(b) of'the N.D.P.S. Act and awarded sentence of 3 ' years by the learned Special Judge. The appellant has completed jail sentence of 3 year, 3 month and 3 days. (14) When the appellant has served the substantive sentence of imprisonment; then his'imprisonment for default of non-pament of ( y fine of 6 months may be reduced into 3 months and 3 days (period already undergone). Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. ' Conviction of theappellant for the offences punishable under Section 20(B) 2(b)‘ of the N.D.P.S. Act is maintained and-sentence is partly modified. The appellant is sentenced to R.l. for 3 years and fine of L Rs.5,000/- in default of payment oftine to undergo additional R.l. for 3 months & 3 days. The appellant has already completed the jail sentence of 3 years, 3 month and 3 days.‘ He shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. H xi " 5m. TP Sharma W, Judge rx, l , l M/a ‘ “f ‘