JUDGMENT

1. The appellants have preferred this appeal against the impugned judgment dated 9.3.2018 passed by Special Judge, NDPS Act, Neemuch (M.P.) in Special (NDPS) Case No.25/2013, whereby the appellants have been convicted under section 8/15(C) of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and each of them have been sentenced to undergo 12 years RI with fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 02 years RI.

2. As per prosecution story, Vikram Dharve, Sub Inspector, Police Station Neemuch Cantt, Neemuch received a secret information on 12.4.2013 that three persons are going towards Rajasthan in a truck bearing registration number RJ-19-GA-6659 loaded with poppy straw. They are also having arms with them. The information was recorded in the daily diary. Two independent witnesses were called and information was sent to the CSP Office through Constable Satish. After completing the preliminary formalities, the team headed by Vikram Dharve reached on the spot. After waiting for half an hour they found truck of the aforesaid number, which was apprehended. The driver of the vehicle disclosed his name Akbar and the other two persons have disclosed their names as Sikandar and Vedprakash. After complying with the provision of section 50 of the NDPS Act, the search was conducted. Upon search two country made pistols of 315 bore were found from the possession of appellant Akbar and Sikandar and from the aforesaid truck 28 sacks containing 13 quintal and 07 Kilogram poppy straw was also found. Since they have failed to produce any licence or permission to carry poppy straw and pistols, therefore, FIR was registered and they were arrested. One more accused Ramlal has been added on the basis of the disclosure of these three appellants.

3. After completing the remaining investigation, they were sent to jail and charge sheet was filed before the trial Court. They were tried under section 8/15 of the NDPS Act and section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act and finally vide judgment dated 9.3.2018 they were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants at the very outset submit that they are not assailing the findings recorded by the learned Special Court in respect of complicity, recovery and quantity of poppy straw. They submit that the appellants are young persons and in the greed of some money, they agreed to transport the poppy straw. They have suffered actual jail sentence of 10 years out of the total 12 years jail sentence awarded to them. They have no criminal past. They were never released on parole and their is no complaint in respect of their conduct in the jail. Therefore, looking to the over all facts in cumulative, the jail sentence awarded to the appellants may kindly be reduced to the period already undergone by them. They are ready to deposit the fine amount.

5. Learned Government Advocate for the respondent / State opposes the said prayer by submitting that looking to the quantity of contraband found from possession of the present appellants, sentence of 12 years has rightly been awarded and same is not liable to be reduced. In this regard, learned Government Advocate has placed reliance upon a judgment by the apex Court in the case of Gurdev Singh v. The State of Punjab reported in (2021) 6 SCC 558.

6. In the case of Gurdev Singh (supra), from the possession of Gurdev Singh 1 kg Heroin was recovered for which the minimum commercial quantity is 250 gms., therefore, the learned Special Judge awarded the sentence of 15 years R.I. instead of 20 years maximum R.I. Gurdev Singh was also found indulging in selling Heroin. The only ground raised by Gurdev Singh for the reduction of sentence was that he is a poor person and is a first offender, therefore, the apex Court has observed that such factors alone cannot be considered for reduction of sentence. In the present case, 13 quintal and 07 Kilogram poppy straw was recovered from the possession of the present appellants, ho