MUKESH KUMAR VERSUS STATE OF M.P. (NOW CHATTISGARH) : Supreme Court - Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

Tags NDPS Sentence
Supreme Court of India

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO...2569 OF 2014 Judgment Date: Dec 12, 2014
                                                          NON-REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO...2569  OF 2014
                 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) NO.6752 OF 2014)


MUKESH KUMAR                                 ...APPELLANT

VERSUS

STATE OF M.P. (NOW CHATTISGARH)              ...RESPONDENT

                               J U D G M E N T

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J.

1.    Leave granted.
2.    This appeal by special leave has  been  preferred  against  the  final
judgment  and  order  dated  28th  October,  2013  of  the  High  Court   of
Chattisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No.1788 of 1997.
3.    The appellant has been convicted under  Section  20(b)(ii)(B)  of  the
Narcotic Drugs and  Psychotropic  Substances  Act,  1985  and  sentenced  to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-
, in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.
4.    Case of the prosecution is  that  the  appellant  was  found  carrying
Cannabis (Ganja) in Scooter bearing Regn. No.BR-16-C/8598.
On  search  conducted  in  accordance  with  the  statutory  provisions  the
contraband to the extent of 500 grams was recovered from the  dicky  of  the
Scooter.  After completing the procedural  requirements  and  receiving  the
report of the Forensic Science Laboratory confirming that the sample of  the
contraband was Ganja, the accused was sent up for trial.  The  case  of  the
prosecution was held to have been duly proved by  the  evidence  led  before
the Court.  The trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as  above.
 The same has been affirmed by the High Court.
5.    When the matter came up before us for hearing on
17th November, 2014, notice was issued limited to the question  of  sentence
having regard to the submission made on behalf of  the  appellant  that  the
appellant had already undergone about four months of  sentence  out  of  six
months awarded to him and in the peculiar facts  and  circumstances  of  the
case, some reduction in sentence  was  called  for.   Accordingly,  we  have
heard learned counsel for the parties on the question of sentence.
6.    Having regard to the totality of circumstances, we  are  of  the  view
that ends of justice will be met if the sentence awarded  to  the  appellant
is  reduced  to  the  period  of  sentence   already   undergone.    Ordered
accordingly.
7.    Since the appellant is  in  custody,  he  may  be  released  forthwith
unless required in connection with any other case.

                                ..........................................J.
                                                        [  T.S. THAKUR ]

                               ...........................................J.
                                                       [ ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ]

NEW DELHI
DECEMBER 12, 2014
Back to Judgments