THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1544 of 2007 17-07-2014 BETWEEN:
Dhanasiri Jettenna …..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.1544 of 2007 JUDGMENT:
The Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused challenging the Judgment, dated 16.10.2007, in NDPS SC. No.35 of 2004 passed by the Hon’ble I Additional Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, whereby the learned Judge found the appellant/accused guilty for the offence under Sections 8(b) read with Section 20(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) and convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only), in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
The case of the prosecution is as follows:-
That on 05.01.2004, on reliable information about cultivation of ganja plants by the accused in his lands, P.Ws.2 to 5, the Excise Officials along with P.W.1, the Panch Witness and another panch witness (LW.2) went to the land of the accused and found 36 ganja plants. He 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) of the NDPS Act.
To prove the guilt of the accused, P.Ws.1 to 5 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.3 and M.O.1 was 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) 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 handicapped person and is the only breadwinner in his family and he has to lookafter his wife and two children, 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) 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. The sentence of fine and default condition, imposed by the Court below, is not interfered with.
Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this appeal, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 17.07.2014 pln