TMI Blog1986 (10) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was recorded, and there is no difficulty in holding that the Petitioner admitted that he was carrying the heroin on behalf of his friend to a place called Abijan in Nigeria. 2. When the Petitioner was produced before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Esplanade, Bombay, in Criminal Case No. 3/CW/86, he pleaded guilty to the charge under Section 135(1) (a)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Sections 13 and 20 of the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930. On recording his plea, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was pleased to convict him under those Sections and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default of the payment of the fine to undergo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orce as from 14th November 1985 and the offence similar to the offences under Sections 13 and 20 of the Dangerous Drugs Act is made punishable under the Narcotic Drugs Act by a minimum term of ten years and maximum twenty years imprisonment. 5. It must be seen that while making the conviction and sentencing the Petitioner, the learned Magistrate has made a reference to this newly extended Act and has made a profused reference as to why a harsh penalty is provided for by the said newly extended Act. Shri Sardar for the Petitioner urged that the learned Magistrate was highly influenced by the new Act in the matter of awarding sentence to the Petitioner; that the penalty provided under the Narcotic Drugs Act is substantially quite harsh and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to go back to his country no sooner he is out of jail. In this view of the matter, there is no difficulty in reducing the sentence of the Petitioner. The circumstances of the case justify that whatever period undergone by the Petitioner till today be held as an adequate sentence in respect of his guilt. I am told by his Counsel that the Petitioner is in jail since last 1 year - 8 months and 22 days. In my view, therefore, the Petitioner could be sentenced to the extent of 1 year - 8 months and 22 days. The sentence as imposed by the two Courts below for two years and a fine of Rs. 3000/- on two counts are quashed and set aside and instead the Petitioner is sentenced to the sentence already undergone by him, as mentioned above. The Petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
