In cases involving small quantities of contraband where the trial has been prolonged for over a decade and the accused has no criminal antecedents, the court may reduce the sentence to the period already undergone in the interest of justice.

Judgement on Board

1. This appeal is preferred under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment dated 03.06.2017 passed by learned Special Judge (NDPS Act)Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case No. 02/2013, wherein the said Court convicted the appellant and sentenced him as under:-

2. Today, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant when the matter was called out. I, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to decide the appeal by appointing a counsel from the High Court Legal Aid Committee. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Manikpuri, empanelled legal aid counsel, is hereby appointed as a counsel for the appellant to argue the appeal on his behalf. The Secretary, High Court legal Aid Committee is directed to issue authorization letter in his favour. I have gone through the judgment under appeal and the depositions of witnesses and exhibits assisted by Mr. Rakesh Kumar Manikpuri through the High Court Legal Services Committee and Learned State Counsel. In view of (2014) 14 SCC 222 ( Surya Baksh Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh ). I do not consider it necessary to adjourn the case and issue fresh notice to the appellant as his interest has been duly taken care of by nominating another Counsel from the High Court Legal Services Committee.

3. As per case of the prosecution, on 07.02.2013 at about 11:20 O’ clock Hemlata Mandwani has received a secret information through the informant that contraband article ganja was kept illegality by the accused in one plastic bag 800 gram and in second plastic bag 700 gram i.e., total 1.500 kg ganja. Upon receiving of this secret information, she recorded the secret information and prepared Mukhbir Suchna Panchnama in presence of the witnesses. She also informed about this information to the higher officials, thereafter she reached the spot along with the witness. In compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act he gave notice to the appellant and obtained his consent for search. After completion of other formalities she returned to the police station along with the seized property in Malkhana. The samples of seized cannabis were sent to FSL for its chemical examination. After completion of due and necessary investigation, a charge-sheet was filed by the police.

4. To robe the appellant in the crime in question, prosecution has examined as many as 10 witnesses. In the statement of the appellant recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the appellant pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case.

5. Learned Trial Court after hearing the counsel for the respective parties and considering the material available on record, has convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned in inaugural para of this judgment.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and confine his arguments to the sentence part thereof only. Further, he submits that the appellant at present is aged about 33 and he is facing criminal trial since 2013 and has already undergone more than 15 days’ jail sentence awarded by the trial Court in NDPS Case No. 02/2013. There is also no previous criminal antecedents against the appellant. Therefore, the jail sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to th