OFFICER THR.PS. KOTWALI (MADHYA PRADESH) v. This appeal coming on for hearing this day, court passed

(SHRI KAPIL MAHANT-PANEL LAWYER) This appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the .....RESPONDENT following: JUDGMENT T his appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C has been preferred challenging the order dated 30.08.2019 passed by Special Judge, NDPS, Ujjain in Special Case No.03/2016 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 08/20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo 01 year R.I and fine of Rs.10,000/- with ususal default stipulations.

#2. The facts in brief are that appellant/accused has been found in possession of 1kg 300gms of Ganja at Manas Bhawan, Kshirsagar, Ujjain. Thereafter, a case was registered against the appellant/accused as Crime No.40/16 at Police Station Kotwali, Ujjain. After completion of investigation Signature Not Verified Signed by: AKANKSHA LAHORIYA Signing time: 1/2/2024 10:32:01 AM chargesheet has been filed before the Special Judge, NDPS Act, 1985, Ujjain. 2

#3. The appellant/accused abjured the guilt. Prosecution has examined Police Constable Dinesh Chouhan PW-1, Police Constable Yogesh Sharma PW-2, Assistant Sub-Inspector Bhagwan Singh Sengar PW-3, Nilesh Gular PW-4, Anil Bairagi PW-5, Retired Head Constable Dinesh Saxena PW-6, Police Constable Rupendra Yadav PW-7, Police Inspector Vivek Kannodiya, Sub-Inspector O.P Joshi PW-09 and after appreciating the evidence convicted appellant/accused under Section 08/20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 and sentenced him as mentioned in para 01 of the judgment.

#4. Challenging the conviction and sentence this appeal has been preferred on the ground that independent witness Nilesh Gular PW-4 and Anil Bairagi PW-5 have not supported the prosecution case. Also, provisions under Section 42, 55, 57 and 52(A) of NDPS Act have not been complied with.

#5. Heard with the aid of amicus curiae Shri Anurag Vyas, learned counsel on behalf of appellant.

#6. Learned Govt. Advocate has opposed the prayer and prayed for its rejection.

#7. Perused the testimony of prosecution witnesses. Trial Court has discussed meticulously every issue raised on behalf of appellant/accused and recorded the findings regarding compliance of Section 50, 55, 45 and 47 of NDPS Act, 1985 in para 25, 29 and 30 of the judgment.

#8. On re-appreciation of evidence of prosecution witnesses, the findings of trial Court regarding conviction of sentence of appellant/accused does not call for interference. Hence, conviction of appellant/accused under Section 08 read with 20 (b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, 1985 is hereby affirmed. Appellant/accused has already undergone the sentence from 11.02.2016 to Signature Not Verified Signed by: AKANKSHA LAHORIYA Signing time: 1/2/2024 10:32:01 AM

30.05.2016 and 30.08.2019 to 24.10.19. 3

#9. Looking to the period of custody and the quantity of contraband seized from the appellant/accused the ends of justice would be served if the period of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone and the amount of fine is enhanced.

#10. Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the sentence awarded to the appellant/accused is hereby reduced to the sentence of period already undergone which is 05 months 14 days b y increasing the fine amount from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.30,000/- to be paid by appellant/accused within 90 days from today.

#11. It is made clear that if the appellant/accused fails to deposit the remaining fine amount before the trial Court, he would suffer additional jail sentence for six months & fifteen days of rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of fine amount.

#12. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary compliance. Certified copy as per rules. akanksha (GAJENDRA SINGH) V. JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signed by: AKANKSHA LAHORIYA Signing time: 1/2/2024 10:32:01 AM