Santosh Jaiswal vs State Of Chhattisgarh

By the impugned judgment dated 18.03.2021 passed in Special NDPS Case No. 30/2017 by the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S.), Bilaspur (C.G.),

the Appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (in short

the “NDPS Actâ€​) Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 05 years, and to pay fine of Rs. 50,000/- with default stipulation.

According to the case of prosecution, on 15.08.2017, Inspector of Police Station- Belgahana Ravindra Mandavi (PW-12) along with Police

personnels were checking vehicles. During checking of vehicles, a motor-cycle driven by the Appellant was stopped and on being searched, it was

found that the Appellant had carried two plastic bags containing total 20 Kgs. of contraband Ganja which has been seized from his possession. On the

basis of above, FIR has been registered against the Appellant. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed by the police. To robe the

Appellant in the crime-in-question prosecution examined as many as total 13 witnesses. In the statement of the Appellant recorded under Section 313

of Cr.P.C, the Appellant pleaded his innocence and false implication in the matter, however no defence witness was examined by the Appellant. After

completion of trial, the Trial Court convicted and sentenced the Appellant as mentioned in Para one of this judgment. Hence, this appeal.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merits and confines his argument to the

sentence part only. He further submits that the Appellant is in jail since 15.08.2017 and completed 04 years out of 05 years of jail sentence, he has no

criminal antecedent and has facing the lis for last four years. Therefore, it is prayed that the jail sentence awarded to the Appellant may be reduced to

the period already undergone by him.

On the contrary, learned State Counsel opposed the appeal and supported the impugned judgment.

I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record minutely.

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering the fact that the Appellant is in jail since 15.08.2017 and

completed about 04 years out of 05 years of jail sentence, he has no criminal antecedent and facing the lis for last four years. I am of the view that the

ends of justice would be met if, while upholding the conviction imposed upon the Appellant, the jail sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period

already undergone by him.

Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The conviction of the Appellant under Section 20(b)(ii-B) of the NDPS Act is affirmed and against the

conviction he is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. The fine sentence for the above offence is also affirmed.

Records of the Court below be sent back along with a copy of this order forthwith for information and necessary compliance.