Reduction of default sentence for indigent NDPS convicts who have completed their substantive term.

The appellant was apprehended on 14.10.2007 following a police stakeout based on secret information regarding illegal arms and contraband trade

A search conducted in the presence of witnesses yielded 1.5 kg of a suspected contraband substance, a country-made pistol, and live cartridges from the appellant's possession

The trial court, vide judgment dated 21.10.2014, convicted the appellant under Sections 20(ii)(B) and 22(A) of the NDPS Act, sentencing him to 7 years of Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) and a total fine of Rs. 40,000, with a default sentence of four months

The appellant challenged the sentence, having already served 7 years and 2 months in custody, citing financial incapacity to pay the fine

1. Whether the default sentence imposed for non-payment of fine can be reduced considering the appellant's marginalized socio-economic status and the period of incarceration already undergone

The Court primarily applied Sections 20(ii)(B) and 22(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act regarding the possession of intermediate quantities of contraband

It further relied on the precedent established in Shanti Lal v. State of M.P. (2007) 11 SCC 243, which grants courts the discretion to reduce a sentence in default of payment of fine, particularly when the convict is of limited means and has already served the substantive term of imprisonment

The Court observed that the appellant did not challenge the conviction itself but sought leniency regarding the sentence

It was noted that the appellant had served 7 years of substantive RI and an additional 2 months in default of the fine

Applying the principles from Shanti Lal, the Court reasoned that since the quantity of contraband was more than "small" but less than "commercial," and the appellant belonged to a marginalized section of society without the means to pay Rs. 40,000, a modification was warranted

The Court determined that the two months already served beyond the substantive sentence were sufficient to satisfy the ends of justice regarding the default penalty

Since the appellant had already completed the substantive 7-year term and the modified 2-month default period, the Court ordered his immediate release, provided he is not required in any other case. The appeal was partly allowed