Praduman Kourav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88687
1 CRA-1747-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
nd
ON THE 2 OF NOVEMBER, 2026
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1747 of 2026
CNR No.: MPHC010121942026
PRADUMAN KOURAV
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Prashant Dubey - Advocate for appellant.
Ms. Seema Jaiswal - Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.
ORDER
This criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 415 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, being aggrieved by the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 10.02.2026 passed by the learned
Special Judge, NDPS Act, Narsinghpur, in Special Case NDPS No.18/2025
whereby the learned Special Judge has convicted the appellant for the
offence punishable under Section 8 read with Section 21(b) of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the
NDPS Act') and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two
years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- with a further direction to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for one year in default of payment of fine.
2. As per the prosecution story, on 14.04.2025 at about 16:30 hours,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 04-11-2026
11:25:32

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88687
2 CRA-1747-2026
the police at the cremation ground, near a tree, saw the appellant sitting in a

suspicious condition. Upon seeing the police, he tried to hide and flee from
the spot. The police apprehended him and he revealed his name as Pradyumn
Kourav. A notice under Section 50 of NDPS Act was served to the appellant.
On searching the appellant, a transparent plastic packet containing light
brown-colored powder was recovered from the right pocket of the jeans pant
worn by him. On physical verification, the substance was identified as
Smack (heroin). On weighing the said contraband on an electronic weighing
scale, the total weight was found to be 06.93 Grams. Seizure memo Ex.P-12
was prepared on the spot. The accused was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.P-
14 and the reason for arrest was informed to him. The recovered substance
was seized and samples were drawn in accordance with the prescribed
procedure. Thereafter, an offence was registered against the appellant at
Crime No.471/2025 at Police Station Gadarwara, District Narsinghpur for
the offence punishable under Sections 8 and 21(b) of the NDPS Act.
3. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed
before the competent Court. After recording the statements of the
prosecution witnesses and appreciating the evidence available on record, the
learned trial Court found the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under
Section 8 read with Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act and sentenced him as
mentioned hereinabove. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of
conviction and order of sentence, the appellant has preferred the present
appeal.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 04-11-2026
11:25:32

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88687
3 CRA-1747-2026
the appellant does not wish to challenge the finding of conviction recorded

by the learned trial Court and confines his challenge to the quantum of
sentence. It is submitted that the appellant is a first-time offender and has no
previous criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that only 6.93 grams of
smack has been recovered from the possession of the appellant, which is just
above the small quantity of 5 grams but, substantially below the commercial
quantity of 250 grams. It is also submitted that the appellant has already
undergone incarceration from 15-04-2025 to 06-11-2025 during trial and
from 10-02-2026 till date, approximately 17 months. Considering the
quantity of contraband involved, the fact that this is the appellant's first
offence and the period of incarceration already undergone, learned counsel
prays that the substantive jail sentence may be reduced to the period already
undergone by the appellant.
5 . Per contra, learned counsel for the State has supported the
findings recorded by the learned trial Court and submitted that, after proper
appreciation of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned trial
Court has rightly convicted the appellant. Accordingly, learned counsel prays
for dismissal of the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the
record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the appeal deserves to be
partly allowed to the extent of modification of the sentence.
7. Though learned counsel for the appellant has not assailed the
finding of conviction on merits, this Court has independently examined the
evidence available on record to satisfy itself as to the legality and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 04-11-2026
11:25:32

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88687
4 CRA-1747-2026
sustainability of the finding of conviction. Upon perusal of the statements of

the prosecution witnesses and the documentary evidence available on record,
this Court finds that the learned trial Court has properly appreciated the
evidence and no illegality or perversity is found in the finding of conviction
recorded by it. Accordingly, the conviction of the appellant for the offence
punishable under Section 8 read with Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act is
hereby affirmed.
8. So far as the question of sentence is concerned, it is apparent from
the record that only 6.93 grams of smack was recovered from the possession
of the appellant. The said quantity is above the notified small quantity of 5
grams but, substantially below the commercial quantity of 250 grams. It is
also submitted on behalf of the appellant that he is a first-time offender and
has no previous criminal antecedents. Further, the appellant has already
undergone incarceration for approximately 17 months. The nature and
quantity of the contraband involved, the absence of previous criminal
antecedents and the substantial period of incarceration already undergone by
the appellant are relevant circumstances for considering the quantum of
sentence. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court
is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met, if the
substantive jail sentence imposed upon the appellant, is reduced to the period
already undergone by him, while maintaining the fine amount imposed by
the learned trial Court.
9. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed. The finding of
conviction recorded by the learned trial Court for the offence punishable
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 04-11-2026
11:25:32

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:88687
5 CRA-1747-2026
under Section 8 read with Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act is hereby affirmed.

However, the substantive sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment
imposed upon the appellant is reduced to the period of imprisonment already
undergone by him i.e. 17 months. The fine amount of Rs.10,000/- imposed
by the learned trial Court is enhanced to Rs.25,000/-. The default sentence
imposed by the learned trial Court shall also remain unchanged. The fine
amount, if already deposited, shall be adjusted accordingly.
10. The appellant be released forthwith, if he is not required in any
other case. The appellant is directed to deposit the enhanced fine amount
within a period of one month failing which the appellant shall undergo the
default sentence as directed by the learned trial Court.
11. With the aforesaid modification in the sentence, the criminal
appeal stands partly allowed and disposed of.
12. Let a copy of this judgment along with the record be sent to the
learned trial Court for information and necessary compliance.
(B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE
PG

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 04-11-2026
11:25:32