Rajan Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 7th March, 2011, delivered by Judge, Special Court, Patiala. The trial court after recording the prosecution evidence, came to the conclusion that the accused/Appellant was guilty of possession of contraband (i.e. 11/2 Kgs of poppy husk. She was convicted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to be as "NDPS Act") and sentenced to undergo RI for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -, in default whereof to further undergo RI for fifteen days.
(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 lady having four unmarried daughters and one unmarried son. According to him, in the present case the quantity of contraband (poppy husk) recovered from the possession of the Appellant is much below the commercial quantity and out of the total awarded sentence of three months, she had already undergone 01 month and 02 days. Learned Counsel, therefore, prays that keeping in view the fact that she has to look after her four daughters and one son and the quantity of contraband recovered from her is much below the commercial quantity, the sentence be reduced to the period already undergone by her.
(3.) LEARNED State counsel has placed on record a reply by way of affidavit dated 6th April, 2011 of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Patiala, according to which the Appellant had already undergone one month of sentence. 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.;