UNION OF INDIA Vs. STEPHEN ANDREAS HOFMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Revision Petition 844/2005 as well as the Criminal Appeal 671/2006. Both, the revision petition and the appeal, have been filed on behalf of the Union of India. The revision petition has been filed in respect of the order on charge dated 19.09.2005 passed by the Special Judge, NDPS, New Delhi whereby he came to the conclusion that the recovery of the contraband was of a small quantity and that the case was triable by a Magistrate. Accordingly, he sent the file to the learned ACMM, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi for trial and disposal of the case as per law. The appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 22.11.2005 as also the order on sentence of the same date passed by the learned ACMM, New Delhi.

(2.) A few important facts need to be stated at the outset. After the passing of the order on charge dated 19.09.2005 (which is the subject matter of the revision petition), the matter was heard and tried by the learned ACMM. The respondent / accused pleaded guilty to the charge under Sections 20 (b) (ii) (A) / 23 (a) read with Section 27 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the NDPS Act'). On the accused pleading guilty, the learned ACMM convicted him of the said offences on 22.11.2005. The order on sentence of the same date was to the effect that the respondent's sentence was limited to the period already undergone by him in custody (three months and seven days) coupled with a fine of Rs 10,000/- under Section 20 (b) (ii) (A) of the NDPS Act. The respondent paid the fine of Rs 10,000/-. The respondent was a Swiss national and his passport had earlier been impounded. On having undergone the aforesaid sentence and fine, the respondent's passport was released by an order of the learned ACMM on 24.11.2005. Thereafter, the respondent left for his home country?Switzerland.

(3.) It is pertinent to note that the order on charge was passed on 19.09.2005, but the revision petition was filed only on 26.11.2005, after the order of conviction and sentence had been passed by the learned ACMM on 22.11.2005. The appeal itself was filed, admittedly, beyond 84 days of the prescribed period. As such, a condonation of delay application was filed alongwith the appeal. I shall refer to the same later.