Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Anumula Raji Reddy vs The State Of A P

High Court Of Telangana|16 December, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.118 of 2009 16-12-2014 BETWEEN:
Anumula Raji Reddy …..Appellant/Accused AND The State of A.P., rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh …..Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.118 of 2009 JUDGMENT:
The Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused challenging the Judgment, dated 20.01.2009, in S.C. No.108 of 2004 passed by the Court of the Special Judge for NDPS Cases-cum-I Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal, whereby the learned Judge found the appellant/accused guilty for the offence under Section 8(b) read with Section 20(a)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) and convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only), in default, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of two years.
The case of the prosecution is as follows:-
That on 31.12.2003, on reliable information about cultivation of ganja plants by the accused in his lands, P.W.5, Sub Inspector of Police, P.S., Duggondi; P.W.7, Sub Inspector of Police, P.S., Nallabelly, and P.W.6, ASI, P.S., Duggondi, along with P.W.4, Panchayat Secretary and L.W.10 to act as mediators, went to the land of the accused and found 96 ganja plants. They collected some leaves and sent the same for chemical examination, and in that chemical examination, it was found that the plants are ganja plants. After completion of the investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 8 (b) read with Section 20(a)(i) of the NDPS Act.
To prove the guilt of the accused, P.Ws.1 to 7 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.20 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused.
On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the appellant/accused guilty for the offence under Section 8(b) read with Section 20(a)(i) of the NDPS Act and convicted and sentenced him as stated above.
Heard and perused the record.
After evaluating and examining the material available on record and considering the respective submissions of the learned counsel, this Court is of the view that there are no special or adequate reasons, warranting interference by this Court with the Judgment passed by the trial Court.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellant/accused confines his argument with regard to quantum of sentence and submits that the accused is the only breadwinner in his family and he has to lookafter his wife and two daughters and also his old aged parents, and as such, he prays this Court to show leniency while imposing sentence of imprisonment.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant/accused and the nature of offence, and also in view of long lapse of time, this Court is inclined to take a lenient view.
In the result, the conviction recorded by the trial Court against the appellant/accused herein for the offence Section 8(b) read with Section 20(a)(i) of the NDPS Act is hereby confirmed. However, this Court, taking a lenient view, modifies and reduces the sentence of imprisonment to the period, which the appellant/accused has already undergone. Further, the sentence of fine imposed by the trial Court is reduced to Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months. It is made clear that if the appellant has already paid an amount of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) as deposit of fine, he need not pay any further amount as fine.
It is further made clear that if the fine amount is paid after the stipulated period and while undergoing default sentence, the appellant/accused shall be released.
The Criminal Appeal is accordingly partly allowed. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this appeal, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 16.12.2014 pln
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Anumula Raji Reddy vs The State Of A P

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
16 December, 2014
Judges
  • Raja Elango