SUBHASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT criminal appeal has been preferred by Subhash, who was named as an accused in case FIR No. 169 dated 13.04.2001, registered at Police Station Ratia, under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the "NDPS Act"). The learned Trial Court vide the impugned judgment dated 28.10.2003 found the appellant guilty of offence under Section 15 of NDPS Act and sentenced him to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.8000/ -, in default whereof, he was to undergo further RI for one

(2.) I need not dilate upon the facts of this case in detail as the same have already been recapitulated in the judgment of the learned Trial Court and in view of the ultimate prayer of the petitioner seeking reduction in sentence.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant states that he is not pressing this appeal on merit and is not challenging the conviction on merit. He is only aggrieved against the sentence part. Learned counsel for the appellant further states that appellant is the first time offender. However, he prays that the sentence of the appellant be suitably reduced as this criminal trial is hanging on his head like Damocles' sword for the last more than thirteen years and it should be a sufficient mitigating circumstance to treat him leniently. Counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the FIR pertains to the year 2001 and since then a period of more than thirteen years has elapsed. The appellant has suffered the ordeal for a long period. In view of the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant, which have been noticed above, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by sending the appellant behind the bars for serving remaining sentence at this point of time. It is a fit case wherein the sentence awarded to the appellant can be reduced to the period already undergone. Ordered accordingly. However, sentence of fine and default clause shall remain intact.