- (1.) Appellant Mehal Singh has filed the present appeal against judgment and order dated 11.5.2004 passed by learned Special Judge, Moga in case FIR No.67 dated 4.4.2000 under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the Act), registered at Police Station, City Moga, whereby he was convicted under Section 15(b) of the Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/- and in default to pay fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.
(2.) At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that he restricts his arguments only to the extent of reduction of sentence awarded by the trial Court and does not assail the judgment of conviction. He has submitted that the appellant is a poor man about more than 60 years of age and has to support his family. According to him, in the present case, quantity of poppy husk recovered from the appellant is much below the commercial quantity and out of total awarded sentence of 3 years, the appellant has already undergone imprisonment for about 9 months. Learned counsel for the appellant, therefore, has prayed that keeping in view the fact that the appellant is a poor and old man and has to support his family and the quantity of contraband recovered from him, which is below the commercial quantity, the sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone by him.
(3.) In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon Shahejadkhan Mahebubkhan Pathan Versus State of Gujarat, 2012 4 RCR(Cri) 684; Nishan Singh Versus State of Punjab, 2011 3 LawHerald(P&H) 1944 and Kaka Singh Versus State of Punjab, 2010 2 RCR(Cri) 383. On the other hand, learned State counsel has filed the affidavit of custody furnished by Surinder Singh, Superintendent, Central Jail, Ferozepur. The same is taken on record. According to the said affidavit, the appellant has undergone imprisonment for 8 months and 29 days as on 7.1.2016. He has, however, submitted that taking into consideration the present time when the use of narcotic contrabands are on high rise, the appellant does not deserve even the reduction of sentence. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.;