9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 439X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act that the appellant is convicted for the first time for the aforesaid offences and no other criminal case was or is pending against the appellant. Looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the sentences of imprisonment of appellant awarded by the trial court for the offences punishable under Sections 8/18 and 8/25 of NDPS Act are reduced from 15 years’ rigorous imprisonment to minimum sentences of 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment for each of the offence. Consequently, this appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining the conviction of appellant - Nand Lal S/o Veni Ram recorded by the trial court for the offences punishable under Sections 8/18 and 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... et, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that he is not challenging the findings of the trial court regarding conviction of the appellant for the aforesaid offences and is simply praying that the sentences of 15 years rigorous imprisonment awarded to the appellant by the trial court for the aforesaid offences be reduced to the minimum sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment. It is contended that the appellant is convicted for the aforesaid offences for the first time and no other criminal case was or is pending against the appellant. It is also contended that the appellant is in custody since 28.05.2007 and at present his age is about 77 years and, as such, he has already served a substantial part of sentence, out of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 8/18 and 8/25 of NDPS Act, the said conviction of the appellant recorded by the trial court is maintained. Now, the question before this Court is whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, sentences awarded to the appellant by the trial court are liable to be reduced or not. In the case of Balwinder Singh (supra), where 175 kg. of heroin and 39 kg. of opium of foreign origin were recovered from one of the accused persons Tarlochan Singh, the Hon ble Supreme Court has ordered as under :- 4. In this case, the appellant Tarlochan Singh was the driver of the vehicle DIL 3372. He was also in custody of vehicle PJA 8677. His statement was recorded under Section 108 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Prosecutor is not in a position to dispute the fact that the appellant is convicted for the first time for the aforesaid offences and no other criminal case was or is pending against the appellant. Looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the sentences of imprisonment of appellant awarded by the trial court for the offences punishable under Sections 8/18 and 8/25 of NDPS Act are reduced from 15 years rigorous imprisonment to minimum sentences of 10 years rigorous imprisonment for each of the offence. Consequently, this appeal is allowed in part. While maintaining the conviction of appellant - Nand Lal S/o Veni Ram recorded by the trial court for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
