- (1.) HEARD .
(2.) THIS is an appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to challenge sustainability of judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.05.2003 passed by learned Special Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, convicting and sentencing the appellant to rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/ - and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment of two months, under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('Act' for short), on proof of the accusation that he was found to keep in his possession poppy -husk weighing 10 kilograms without any permit or licence.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant very candidly submits that he has nothing to say as regards correctness of findings of conviction as recorded by the learned trial Court, but he prays for a lenient view as regards quantum of sentence. It comes out from the record that on the day of commission of offence the appellant was 22 -23 years of age. He has been facing ordeal of tough investigation, protracted trial and subsequent proceedings since 14.02.1999. There is nothing available on record to show that he has been involved in any other case of similar nature since the registration of First Information Report in this case. It also comes out that sentence awarded to him was suspended as it was found that he has already undergone seven months custody (as is reflected from order dated 20.10.2003). Quantity of the contraband is on the lower side. In view of the above, I am of the considered view that the appellant, if allowed an opportunity, may reform himself and as such he is entitled to leniency as regards quantum of sentence. As aforesaid, the appellant does not dispute the correctness of findings of the conviction as recorded by the Court below, however, in view of the circumstances put forth by the learned counsel for the appellant, he, certainly, is entitled to leniency as regards quantum of sentence.;