Ratan Lal And Ors vs State Of Rajasthan

Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 06.10.2012 passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 01/2008 by which the learned Judge convicted the appellants for offence under Section 8/18(C) NDPS Act and sentenced them to undergo three years' R.I. alongwith fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default of payment of fine to undergo three months' R.I.

Brief facts of the case are that on 06.03.2008 SHO Tara Singh Bhadoria along with Police party was going for patrolling. At about 5:50 PM they reached near Shamodi Triangle where two persons, who were walking turned and went back on seeing the police party. On this unnatural attitude, they were called by the police but they tried to run away. They were caught by the Police and on search, 400 Gm. opium was recovered from Ratan Lal and 300 Gm. opium was recovered from Shanker Lal without any valid licence. After seizure of opium, they were arrested and FIR was lodged for offence under Sections 8/18 NDPS Act and started investigation. Subsequently accused Narayan Gurjar was also arrested. After thorough investigation, the Police filed charge-sheet for offence under Sections 8/18 agaisnt the appellants and for offence under Section 8/29 NDPS Act against accused Narayan Lal before the competent court. Thereafter, the charges were framed against the appellants and accused Narayan Lal for the aforesaid offences. They denied the charges and claimed trial.

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses and various documents were also exhibited. Thereafter, statements of appellants and accused Narayan Lal under section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded. In defence, no witness was produced, however some documents were exhibited.

Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 06.10.2012 acquitted the accused Narayan Lal but convicted and sentenced the appellants for offence under Section 8/18(C) NDPS Act as mentioned earlier.

At the threshold, learned counsel for the appellants does not challenge the finding of conviction but it is submitted that since the occurrence relates back to year 2008 and in the present case total 700 gram opium was recovered from the appellants which is below commercial quantity and further the appellants have so far suffered a sentence of about four months out of total sentence of three years, therefore, it is prayed that the substantive sentence awarded to the appellants for the aforesaid offence may be reduced to the period already undergone by them. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellants relied upon judgment of this Court in the case of Mohammad Ali v. State of Rajasthan reported in 2013(4) CJ(Cri.) (Raj.) 1914, Niyamat Ali Nemu v. State of Rajasthan reported in 2013(4) CJ(Cri.) (Raj.) 1915, Sher Singh vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2016(1) WLN 156 (Raj.).

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants. The learned PP submitted that there is neither any occasion to interfere with the sentence awarded to the accused appellants nor any compassion or sympathy is called for in the said case.

Since the appellants' counsel does not challenge the appellants' conviction, this Court need not go into the merits of the case and accordingly, the conviction of the appellants as recorded by the learned trial court for the offence under Section 8/18(C) NDPS Act is maintained.

I have perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as defence and the judgment passed by the trial court regarding conviction of the accused-appellants. It is not disputed that the occurrence relates back to year 2008 and total 700 grams opium was recovered from the appellants which is below commercial quantity and the appellants have so far undergone a period of about four months incarceration out of the three years' rigorous imprisonment so also suffered the agony and trauma of protracted trial. Thus, looking to the over-all circumstances and the fact that the appellants have remained behind the bars for considerable time, it will be just and proper if the sentence awarded by the trial court for offence under Section 8/18(C) NDPS Act is reduced to the period already undergone by them while maintaining the amount of fine in the sum of Rs. 10,000/-.

Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. While maintaining the appellants' conviction and sentence for offence under Section 8/18(C) NDPS Act, the sentence awarded to them is reduced to the period already undergone, however the amount of fine is hereby maintained. In default of payment of fine, the appellants shall undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment. Two month's time is granted to deposit the fine before the trial court. Appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds stand discharged.

The record of the trial court be sent back forthwith.