Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2022 (8) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2022 (8) TMI 553 - SC - Indian Laws


Issues involved:
1. Conviction under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act
2. Sentencing of the appellant
3. Consideration of factors for imposing sentence higher than the minimum prescribed
4. Examination of procedural compliance under Sections 42, 50, and 55 of the NDPS Act
5. Appeal against the judgment and order dated 26th February, 2018

Issue 1: Conviction under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act
The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act for possessing a commercial quantity of illegal 'Ganja' along with her two children. The prosecution's case was based on the recovery of cannabis from the appellant's house, leading to charges against her and other co-accused. The trial court found the appellant guilty while acquitting the other co-accused. The High Court upheld the conviction based on the recovery of the substance from the appellant's residence, disregarding her illiteracy and senior citizen status.

Issue 2: Sentencing of the appellant
The trial court sentenced the appellant to 15 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, with an additional three years of imprisonment in case of default. The appellant, being an illiterate senior citizen with no criminal history, appealed against the severity of the sentence. The Supreme Court acknowledged the seriousness of NDPS offences but considered the appellant's background and reduced her sentence to 12 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, with a default provision of six months of imprisonment.

Issue 3: Consideration of factors for imposing a higher sentence
The Supreme Court noted that the trial court and the High Court failed to consider the factors required for imposing a sentence higher than the minimum prescribed under Section 32B of the NDPS Act. While emphasizing the gravity of NDPS offences, the Court balanced this with the appellant's background and lack of criminal record, leading to a reduction in the sentence.

Issue 4: Examination of procedural compliance under Sections 42, 50, and 55 of the NDPS Act
The Court highlighted the lack of examination of procedural compliance under Sections 42, 50, and 55 of the NDPS Act in the case. It noted that the prosecution did not adequately address the involvement of other co-accused residing in the same house or their role in the illegal trade, focusing solely on the appellant's presence in the house during the recovery of the substance.

Issue 5: Appeal against the judgment and order dated 26th February, 2018
The appellant's appeal against the judgment and order dated 26th February, 2018, was based on the severity of the sentence imposed despite her background as an illiterate senior citizen with no criminal record. The Supreme Court modified the sentence, taking into account the appellant's circumstances and reduced it to 12 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, ensuring that justice was served while considering the appellant's age and background.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates