THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.3, 8, 11 AND 36 of 2009 12-12-2014 BETWEEN:
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.3 OF 2009 Sd.Waseem AND …..Appellant/Accused No.7 State of Andhra Pradesh by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad For the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh.
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.8 OF 2009 …..Respondent Sk.Wahed AND …..Appellant/Accused No.9 State of Andhra Pradesh by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad For the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh.
…..Respondent CRIMINAL APPEAL No.11 OF 2009 Hamsavalli and another.
…..Appellant/Accused Nos.3 and 5 AND State of Andhra Pradesh by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad For the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh.
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.36 OF 2009 …..Respondent Md.Feroz AND …..Appellant/Accused No.8 State of Andhra Pradesh 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 Nos.3, 8, 11 AND 36 of 2009 COMMON JUDGMENT:
All these appeals are arising out of the common Judgment, and as such, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common Judgment.
Criminal Appeal No.3 of 2009 is filed by A.7, Criminal Appeal No.8 of 2009 is filed by A.9, Criminal Appeal No.11 of 2009 is filed by A.3 and A.5 and the Criminal Appeal No.36 of 2009 is filed by A.8 challenging the Judgment dated 31.12.2008 passed in N.D.S.C.No.16 of 2006 by the Court of the Special Judge under the NDPS Act-cum-I Additional Sessions Judge, Adilabad, whereby the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants/A.3, A.5 and A.7 to A.9 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years each and also to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) each, in default, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of three months each for the offence under Section 20(b)(i) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act).
The case of the prosecution is as follows:-
That when P.Ws.1 and 2, Reserve Police Constables, were on platform duty of Basara Railway Station, they found A.1 to A.6 with suit cases and bags. Seeing the police, they tried to ran away, but were caught by the police. On enquiry, A.1 to A.6 revealed that they were transporting ganja and for that purpose, they engaged Tama Sumo vehicle, which was kept outside of the railway station. At the instance of A.1 to A.6, they found Tata Sumo along with three persons, A.7 to A.9. On apprehending all the persons along with 70 kgs of ganja in four suit cases and three bags, the accused were brought to Railway Police Station, Nizamabad along with Tata Sumo vehicle. Police seized the suitcases and bags under the cover of panchanama. Sample of ganja was sent for chemical examination and after receipt of the chemical examination report stating that it was ganja, the police filed charge sheet for the offence under Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act.
To prove the guilt of the accused, P.Ws.1 to 7 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.5 and M.Os.1 to 14 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 appellants/accused guilty for the offence under Section 20(b)(i) of the NDPS Act and convicted and sentenced them as stated above. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is preferred by the appellants/A.3 and A.5 and A.7 to A.9.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants/ A.3 and A.5 and A.7 to A.9 and the learned Public Prosecutor, and perused the material available on record.
After evaluating and examining the material available on record and considering the 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 appellants/ A.3 and A.5 and A.7 to A.9 confine their arguments with regard to quantum of sentence, and submit that as the appellants/ A.3 and A.5 and A.7 to A.9 are the only breadwinners in their respective families and they are the first offenders and they have to lookafter their children, lenient view may be taken by this Court while imposing sentence of imprisonment.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants/ A.3 and A.5 and A.7 to A.9 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 appellants/ A.3 and A.5 and A.7 to A.9 for the offence under Section 20(b)(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 appellants/ A.3 and A.5 and A.7 to A.9 have already undergone. The sentence of fine and default condition, imposed by the Court below, is not interfered with.
The Criminal Appeals are accordingly partly allowed. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in these appeals, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 12.12.2014 pln