Sentencing discretion for intermediate quantity of ganja led to reduction of rigorous imprisonment while conviction stood unchanged

Possession of 6.300 kg of ganja, a quantity between small and commercial limits, attracted the statutory maximum of ten years' rigorous imprisonment. Considering the quantity recovered and the fact that six years' imprisonment had already been undergone, the Court interfered only with the sentence and reduced it to six years' rigorous imprisonment. The conviction was left undisturbed, and the remainder of the judgment was not altered.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sentence of ten years' rigorous imprisonment imposed for possession of 6.300 kg of ganja, falling between small quantity and commercial quantity, required reduction having regard to the quantity recovered and the period of imprisonment already undergone.

Analysis: The quantity recovered was 6.300 kg, which was above small quantity and below commercial quantity. The maximum punishment applicable to the offence was ten years' rigorous imprisonment. The appellant had already undergone six years' rigorous imprisonment. In these circumstances, the sentence warranted interference only to the extent of quantum, while the conviction and the remainder of the judgment were not disturbed.

Conclusion: The sentence was reduced from ten years' rigorous imprisonment to six years' rigorous imprisonment, and the appeal succeeded only to that extent.

Final Conclusion: The conviction remained undisturbed, but the custodial sentence was modified to six years' rigorous imprisonment.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the recovered quantity is between small and commercial quantity and the maximum statutory punishment is ten years, the sentence may be reduced having regard to the quantity recovered and the period already undergone.

---