The court may consider reducing the sentence for non-commercial quantities of contraband and absence of criminal antecedents.

JUDGMENT :

1. This criminal appeal is preferred under section 374 of Cr.P.C. by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 04.07.2017, passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Act, District-Shajapur, in Special Case (NDPS) No.6/2017, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 8(c)/18(c) of NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo 05 years RI with fine of Rs.40,000/- and default stipulation.

2. A s per the case of prosecution on 07.05.2017, on a discrete information, the police has recovered one KG and 100Grmas of Opium from possession of the appellant. Thereafter, following the due procedure of law, FIR was registered. Thereafter, investigation was conducted and charge sheet was filed after which the charges were framed against the present appellant but he denied the same and expressed his willingness to face the trial, the present appellant was found guilty for the offences u/s 8(c)/18(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985.

3. The appellant has preferred this criminal appeal on several grounds but during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant did not press this appeal on merits and not assail the finding part of judgment. He confines his arguments on the point of sentence. Counsel for the appellant assures that the appellant will not involve in such criminal activities in future. He also submitted that the appellant has suffered more than 15 months custody period. He further submitted that he is having regard to all circumstances which resulted in appellant's conviction. Further keeping in view the fact that the appellant was facing the trial before the concerned Court for almost 07 years, therefore, he prayed that the appeal be partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the appellant be reduced to the period already undergone.

4. In support of his contention, counsel for the appellant has placed reliance over the judgment passed in CRA No.7063/2022 (Mukesh Kumar Jatav Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh) decided on 12.05.2023 wherein co-ordinate Bench of this Court has reduced and undergone the sentence of the appellant in only 09 months out of 10 years. Similarly, in this Bench in the case of Tulsiram vs. State of M.P. passed in CRA No.12105/2023 decided on 01.12.2023 wherein this Bench has passed the sentence of six months out of four years of imprisonment by enhancing the fine from Rs.30000/- to Rs.100000/-.

5. Learned Govt. Advocate has opposed the prayer. He supported the judgment and order by submitting that there is clear evidence against the appellant, therefore, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

6. I have considered rival contentions of the parties and have perused the record.

7. So for as the contentions on merits of the case raised by learned counsel for the appellant is concerned, the learned trial Court has not committed any error in appreciation of evidence available on record. Further, it is found that the Court below considered the evidence available on record and correctly found that the case of the prosecution is well supported by the witnesses and documentary testimony. The procedure was well followed by the prosecution and the witnesses of prosecution have profoundly supported the prosecution case. The Court below has well considered the material available on record, hence, no infirmity is found in the impugned order of conviction passed by the Court below, accordingly, the same is upheld.

8. In so far as the sentence is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant has prayed only on the part of sentence and submitted that since the appellant has already suffered more than 15 months of his jail incarceration, he may be released only with the undergone sentence by enhancing the fine amount.

9. In this regard, earlier also the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as this Court has also considered the prayer and reduced the incarceration period of the accused persons to the period already undergone in the cases where the quantity of the contraband is found to be of non-commercial or