-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR J U D G M E N T Anshu Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan S.B.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.92/2000 against the judgment dt.23.2.2000 passed by the Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Chittorgarh, in Sessions Case No.51/1998. Date of Judgment: May 02, 2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DEO NARAYAN THANVI Mr.R.S.Makad, for appellant. Mr.Vishnu Kachhwaha, Public Prosecutor. BY THE COURT : 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Chittorgarh dated 23.2.2000, whereby he convicted accused appellant Anshu Singh for the offence u/s.8/15 of the NDPS Act, hereinafter referred-to as “the Act”, and sentenced him to 12 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.one lac and in default, to further undergo one year's R.I. -2- 2. The charge against the accused was that on 12.5.1998, accused Anshu Singh was found having possession of 276 kgms. of poppy straw on his Matador bearing No.RJ 06 G 676 contained in nine bags, which was recovered by the police when he was crossing through village Chudawaton Ka Kheda. The accused was having no licence for the same. After completing the formalities of various provisions of the Act including giving notice etc. and sampling, he was challaned under Sec.8/15 of the Act by keeping the investigation pending u/s.173(8) CrPC against co accused Kundan Singh, Chen Singh and Onkar Singh. The learned trial Judge framed the charge to which he pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses. The statement of accused Anshu Singh was recorded u/s.313 CrPC. He produced Kuber Singh, DW 1 in his defence. After hearing the arguments, the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the accused appellant as above. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant does not want to argue the case on merits. He simply submits that the accused is in custody since 13.5.1998 i.e. almost ten years, whereas he has been sentenced to 12 years' R.I., though the minimum sentence provided for under the Act is ten years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.one lac. According to the learned counsel, accused is a poor agriculturist and no previous offence is proved against him, -3- therefore, a lenient view may be taken. 4. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that minimum sentence provided for under the Act is ten years and a fine of Rs.one lac, there is no special reason to maintain the sentence of 12 years' R.I. 5. Consequently, this appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining the conviction of the accused appellant Anshu Singh u/s.8/15 of the Act recorded by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Chittorgarh, vide his judgment dt.23.2.2000, he is sentenced to ten years' R.I., instead of twelve years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.one lac and in default, to further undergo one year's R.I. (DEO NARAYAN THANVI), J. RANKAWAT JK, PS