-^. SisiSieBeftch BEFORE THE HON'Bl.E HIGH COURT OF CHMATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRlMINALAPPEALNo. J'^ 1 2011 APPELLANT: (IN JAIL) ^^ A-- RESPONDENT: Sudru . S/o Mitthu, Agedabout 47 years, Caste- Bhatra,Occupation-Labour, R/o Village- Panara Para, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, C.G. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Nagarnar, District- Bastar, C.G. MEMQ QEAPPEAL UNDER SECTION LL OFTHECODEOF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973 AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 20/05/2010^ CONVICTXQN SENTENCE m '^* 3.!i: .II \vv HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISOARH AT BIIASPUR SB : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICB PRITINKER DIWAKER -<? APPELtANT CR.A.HO, 13772011 Sudru versus StateofC.G. Shri Vimlesli Bajpai, counsel for tlie Smt. Smita Ghai, P.L. for tiie State. APPEAL U/S 374(2) 0?THi;CMMraALPROCEDURB_CODE (05.0S.2011) Th.e present appeal arises out of ttte jiidgment &, ordcr dated 20.05.2010 passed by the Special Judge (NDPS Acti, Jagdalpur in Special Case No. 47/2008 convictiug fhe accused/appeflaat for the ofEence punistiable under Section 20(b)(i^(B) offhe Narcotics Durgs Sii Psychotropic Substances Act aud sentenciag him. to undei^o rigorous imprisoiunent for fhree years and to pay fine ofRs. 3,000. 2. Brief facts of fhe case are that on 30. 10.08, at 12.3Q noon, upon receiviug secret iaformatton on telephone, Asstt. Sub Inspector K.D.Siogh (P.W.-3) apprehended the appeBaat who was standiag on fhe roadside near the Dhanpuuji Krishi Upaj Maudi JVafca NH 43 and fouud fhe accused/appeBant carrying 10 kgs. of gcaya ia two bags of red and purple colour in his possession. After conipletiag aU ttie formalities as required under ffae law, tlie said contrabaud (ganja) was Seized vide Ex.P/8, saiaples were sent for FSL and fh.e report was received vide Ex.P/30 dated 4.10.08. After aivestigation, cliaUan was filed on 18.12.08 under Section 20 (b) oftbe NDPS Act. 3. In order to estabU.sh ttie guilt of fhe accused, thc prosecutioa bas exauuned iiiae witaesses. Stateinent of fhc accused/appeUant was also recorded under Section 313 of fhe Cr.P.C. ia which he denied the chai^es leveUed agaiast him. and pleaded his inaocence and false impUcation in fhe case. 4. After hearing counsel for fhe parties, fhe trial Court has convicted aud sentenced fhe accused/appeBaat for fhe offcnce as inentioned above. Hence fhis appeal. 5. Heard counsel for the parties and penised the material avaUable on reconl iuclucting fhe impugned judgment. 6. Contention of Sbri Bajpai, couasel for the appeDant is that he is not pressing this appeal on merits aud woiild coufine his arguinent to fhe sentence part of the saiue only. He subxnits ftiat fhe appellant is in jafl siuce 4. 10.08 and has ahiady uiidergoae the sentence of 2 8& % years. He furfher subnrits tbat fhe appeUaat has no previous cnminal recoid, is a poor person, haviag faauly responsjbiltfy, it wouM be ia fhe interest ofjustice ifthe sentence uaposed on hiui is reduced to (he period already undeigone by luin. To this counsel for the State has no serious objection. 7. Considering the facts aad ciroiimstaaces of the case, ia particular fhat fhe appellaat has no previous crinunal record, is a poor person-a rickshaw pullgr, having fanuly responsibility, is in jail since 2 & 'A years, this Court is of fhe view fhat it would be in the iaterest of justice if fhe jail scntEnce iiaposed 011 fbe accused/appeUant is reduced to the period already undei^one by hiin. 8. Accordiagty, fhe appeal M parUy aUowed. JaU sentence unposed on the acciised/appellant is reduced to the period already undergoue by hica. However, fhe sentence of fine imposed by the Court below is enhaaced to Rs. 2,000 ia addition to fhat of Rs. 3000 to be paid by ttie accused/appellaat (total fine would be Rs. 5,000). This order shaB becouie operational only ater the appeUant deposits fhe entire amouut offine before the Court below. Appeal &us partty succeeds. pritiuker Diwaker Judge x'