Default imprisonment for fine must stay proportionate to custody served, health condition and offender's circumstances.

Conviction for possession and attempted export of heroin was left undisturbed because the finding of guilt was not challenged on merits. The default sentence for non-payment of fine was reduced to three months on each count, as the accused had nearly completed the substantive term, was in poor health and HIV positive, and had shown satisfactory custody conduct. The ruling treats default imprisonment as distinct from substantive punishment and requires it to remain proportionate to the offence, the fine and the offender's circumstances. The fine and substantive sentence were maintained.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the conviction under Section 21(c) and Section 28 read with Section 23(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 required interference when it was not challenged; (ii) Whether the default sentence imposed on non-payment of fine called for reduction having regard to the appellant's custody period, health condition and financial incapacity.

Issue (i): Whether the conviction under Section 21(c) and Section 28 read with Section 23(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 required interference when it was not challenged.

Analysis: The appellant did not assail the finding of guilt recorded by the trial court. The conviction was based on possession of heroin and the attempt to export it, and no challenge was pressed to the merits of that finding.

Conclusion: The conviction was confirmed.

Issue (ii): Whether the default sentence imposed on non-payment of fine called for reduction having regard to the appellant's custody period, health condition and financial incapacity.

Analysis: The appellant had already undergone nearly the entire substantive term, was reported to be in poor health and HIV positive, and her overall conduct in custody was satisfactory. The Court applied the principle that imprisonment in default of payment of fine is distinct from substantive punishment and must be fixed with regard to the nature of the offence, the offender's circumstances and the size of the fine. Reliance was placed on the approach that default imprisonment should not be excessive where substantial imprisonment has already been suffered.

Conclusion: The default sentence was reduced to three months on each count, while the fine and substantive sentence were maintained.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of reducing the default imprisonment on non-payment of fine, while the conviction and substantive sentence remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Default imprisonment for non-payment of fine is a penalty distinct from substantive imprisonment and must be proportionate to the offence and the offender's circumstances, especially where a substantial custodial sentence has already been undergone.

---