Back
2014 Supreme(SC) 1217
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, Pinaki Chandra Ghose, JJ.
Natha Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1150 of 2014 (arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5920 of 2013)
Decided On : 09-05-2014
For the Petitioner:Mr. S. Ravi Shankar, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Jayant K. Sud, A.A.G., Ms. Jasleen Chahal, Asst. A.G., Mr. Ajay P. Tushir, Mr. Vishal, Ms. Bonita and Mr. Kuldip Singh, Advocates.
The court has the discretion to consider the time already undergone by the appellant in determining the appropriate sentence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Headnote:
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sentence - Reduction of sentence based on time already undergone
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was convicted under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced to sixteen years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2 lakh. The petitioner had already been in custody for fourteen years.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that reducing the sentence to thirteen years of rigorous imprisonment and maintaining the fine of Rs. 2 lakh would meet the ends of justice. The appellant would be set at liberty if he had already undergone the reduced sentence.
Issues: The main issue was the appropriateness of the sentence imposed under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, considering the time already undergone by the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the time already spent in custody and decided to reduce the sentence to meet the ends of justice.
Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, and the sentence of the appellant was modified to thirteen years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2 lakh.
ORDER :
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J.
Petitioner, aggrieved by his conviction under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of sixteen years and fine of Rs. 2 lakh, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year, has preferred this special leave petition.
2. Delay condoned.
3. Leave granted limited to the question of sentence.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant had already remained in custody for fourteen years and the ends of justice shall be met if the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel representing the respondent-State, however, submits that the sentence awarded cannot be said to be excessive.
6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that rigorous imprisonment for a period of thirteen years and fine of Rs. 2 lakh, in default, to suffer imprisonment for one year shall meet the ends of justice.
7. In case the appellant has undergone sentence to the extent of the aforesaid period, he shall be set at liberty forthwith, if otherwise not required in any other case.
8. In the result, we partly allow this appeal and modify the sentence of the appellant, as aforesaid.
Appeal partly allowed.
