Rajan Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 6th December, 2010, delivered by Special Court, Sangrur. The trial court after recording the prosecution evidence, came to the conclusion that the accused/Appellant was guilty of possession of contraband (i.e. 500 grams of opium). He was convicted under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ -, in default whereof to further undergo RI for two months.
(2.) FEELING aggrieved against the judgment of the trial court, the Appellant has approached this Court through the instant appeal. Learned Counsel for the Appellant states that he is limiting his prayer only to the extent of reduction in the sentence awarded and does not assail the judgment of conviction. Learned Counsel has submitted that the Appellant is a poor man and sole bread winner of his family. According to him, in the present case the quantity of opium recovered from the possession of the Appellant is much below the commercial quantity and out of the total awarded sentence of one year, by now he has undergone 03 months and 25 days. Learned Counsel, therefore, prays that keeping in view the fact that he is a poor man and has to support his family and the quantity of contraband recovered from him is below the commercial quantity, the sentence be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
(3.) LEARNED State counsel has placed on record a reply by way of affidavit dated 2nd February, 2011 of the Superintendent, District Jail, Sangrur, according to which the Appellant had undergone 03 months and 08 days of sentence as on 25.1.2011. He submits that in case conviction of the Appellant is maintained, the court may reduce the sentence as deemed appropriate in the circumstances of the case.;