1. The Appellant stands convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount to undergo additional R.I. for 1 year under Section 21(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('the NDPS Act' in short), as ordered on 23.9.2015 by the Special Judge (NDPS Act), Ambikapur, District Surguja in Special Criminal Case No. 16 of 2014.

2. Brief facts of the case as per the prosecution is that on 3.7.2014 at around 6.00 pm, PW-7, V.K. Awasthi, the Investigating Officer, received a secret information in respect of the present Appellant involved in the selling of the contraband, brown sugar, and that he was looking for customers. Subsequently, after the completion of all the formalities under the NDPS Act, the police officials conducted a raid and in the presence of the witnesses caught the present Appellant and he was subjected to search near Kedarpur Mission Chowk. During the course of the search it was found that the Appellant in his pocket was carrying brown sugar weighing 10.410 gram. After completion of the mandatory statutory requirements under the NDPS Act, charge-sheet was filed and the matter was put to trial before the Special Judge (NPDS Act), Ambikapur where the case was registered as Special Criminal Case No. 16 of 2014. Charge under Section 21(B) of the NDPS Act was framed against the Appellant.

3. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 7 witnesses in support of its case. There was no witness examined in defence. That among the independent witnesses one witness had died before he could be examined and the other witnesses have turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution. Relying upon the evidence of the departmental witnesses, the Court below vide impugned judgment found the Appellant to be guilty of having committed the offence under Section 21(B) of the NDPS Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.1,00,000/- with default stipulation, leading to the filing of the present appeal.

4. Shri Sunil Sahu, learned Counsel for the Appellant, at the outset submits that he does not intend to argue the case on merits so far as the conviction of the Appellant in the instant case under Section 21(B) of the NDPS Act is concerned. He makes a specific prayer that this Court may consider on the question of sentence which has been imposed by the Court below. According to him, the Court below on both aspects on sentence as well as on fine has awarded the maximum that has been prescribed under Section 21(B) of the NDPS Act. He further submits that it is a case where the Appellant is said to have found in possession of 10.410 gram of brown sugar and the said quantity is more than the small quantity and less than the commercial quantity. According to the Counsel for the Appellant, the small quantity as per the NDPS Act is 5 gram and the commercial quantity as per the Act is 250 gram. That the Appellant has exceeded by only 5.410 gram from that of the small quantity and that the punishment which has been imposed upon the Appellant is exorbitant, highly excessive and harsh for the reason that for 5 gram of contraband the Act itself stipulates the maximum sentence of one year and that if the said quantity exceeds by another 5 gram as happened in the instant case as the quantity seized was 10.410 gram, as such, the excess is of 5.10 gram more than small quantity of 5 gram, the maximum sentence which should have been imposed should be somewhere around two years. According to the Counsel for the Appellant, when for 5 gram the maximum is 1 year, therefore for 10 gram the maximum should be around 2 years.

5. It was further contended by the Counsel for the Appellant that the Appellant has already remained in custody for a period of two years and four months and as such he has remained in custody for a sufficient long time, therefore the sentence part imposed upon him may be reduced to