High Court reduces NDPS Act sentence for opium possession, orders immediate release after 11 years served.

The High Court upheld the conviction under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act but reduced the sentence from 15 years to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) for possession of opium without a license. The default sentence in lieu of non-payment of the fine was reduced from two years to one year of RI. The appellants, having served over 11 years, were ordered to be released immediately unless needed in another case.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Conviction under Section 8/18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
2. Sentencing and quantum of punishment.
3. Default sentence in lieu of non-payment of fine.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Conviction under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act:
The appellants were convicted by the trial court for the offence under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act for possessing 18 kg 400 gm of opium without a license or permit. The police, acting on a secret tip-off, intercepted a black Santro car and found the contraband. The trial court, after examining thirteen prosecution witnesses and one defense witness, found the appellants guilty and sentenced them accordingly.

2. Sentencing and Quantum of Punishment:
The trial court sentenced the appellants to 15 years of rigorous imprisonment (RI) and imposed a fine of Rs. 1,50,000 each, with an additional two years of RI in default of payment of the fine. The appellants did not challenge their conviction but sought a reduction in their sentence, arguing that they had already served 11 years and 4 months of their sentence. The appellants' counsel cited the Supreme Court judgments in Shahfjad Khan Maebub Khan Pathan vs. State of Gujarat and Balwinder Singh & Ors vs. Asstt. Commissioner, Custom and Central Excise to support the plea for a reduced sentence.

The High Court upheld the conviction but reduced the sentence from 15 years to 10 years, considering the appellants to be first-time offenders. The court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Shahfjad Khan Maebub Khan Pathan, which reduced the sentence of appellants in a similar case from 15 years to 10 years, and Balwinder Singh, where the sentence was reduced from 14 years to 10 years.

3. Default Sentence in Lieu of Non-Payment of Fine:
The appellants also argued that the additional two years of RI in default of fine payment was harsh. The court referred to the Supreme Court's guidelines in Shahfjad Khan Maebub Khan Pathan and Shantilal vs. State of M.P., which emphasize that default sentences should consider the nature of the offence, the offender's circumstances, and the pecuniary situation. The court noted that default sentences are penalties for non-payment of fines and should not be excessively harsh.

The High Court reduced the default sentence from two years to one year, maintaining the Rs. 1,50,000 fine. The court highlighted that the appellants could avoid the default sentence by paying the fine and considered their financial status and the nature of the offence.

Conclusion:
The High Court partially allowed the appeal, confirming the conviction under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act but reducing the sentence from 15 years to 10 years of RI and the default sentence from two years to one year of RI. The appellants, having already served 11 years and 4 months, were ordered to be released forthwith, provided they were not required in any other case. The trial court's record was ordered to be sent back immediately.

---