Partly allowed

M. Alliyanna Goud, v. the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd.

Telangana HC12 Jul 2022CRLA/1091/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal against conviction and six-month imprisonment for NDPS offence. Court reduced imprisonment to period already undergone while maintaining fine, partly allowing appeal based on co-accused's prior relief.

What did the court decide?

Sentence of six months simple imprisonment modified to period already undergone; conviction confirmed; fine and default conditions upheld.

M. Alliyanna Goud, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

Bail Slip:- The Accused was directed to be released on bail by the order of the High Court dated 05/06/2018 in l.A.No.2 of 2008 in Crl.A.No.1091 of 2006

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1091 OF 2008

¶7

Criminal Appeal filed Under Section 374 l2l of Cr.P.C against the Judgment made in N.D.S.C.No.54 of 2006 dated 07.07.2008 on the file of the Court of the I Additional Sessions Judge at Mahabubnagar.

¶8

Between:

¶9

M. Alliyanna Goud, S/o Balaiah Goud, Coolie, R/o Sripur Village, Nagarkurnool Mandal' Mahabubnagar District'

¶10

...AppELLANT/AccusED No.1

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of A.P., Rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad

¶13

,.. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶14

Counsel for the Appellant : SRl. M DAMODAR REDDY

¶15

Counsel forthe Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

¶17

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶18

CzuMINAL APPEAL No. 1O91 of 2OO8

¶19

JUDGMENT:

¶20

This appeal is preferred by the appellant/Al against the conviction and sentence imposed by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Mahaboobnagar, in N.D.S.C.No.54 of 2006 vide^judgment dated O7.O7.2OO8, wherein the appeliant/Al was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs. 100/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one week for the offence under Section 8(c) r/w 22(al of N.D.P.S.AcI along with A-2.

¶21

Learnecl counsel for the appellant would submit that 42Madhusudhan Goud preferred Criminal Appeal No.974 of 2008, which was partly allowed by this Court on 01.08.2014.

¶22

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State did not dispute the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the appellant.

¶23

In view of above as the allegations against A-1 and A-2 are the same and A-2's sentence was reduced to the period

¶24

¶25

<br>

¶26

already undergone, against which there is no appeal preferred by the prosecution, the appellant/Al is eirtitled for the similar relief.

¶27

In the result, the conviction imposed by the iearned I Additional Sessions Judge, Mahaboobnagar, in N.D.S.C.No.54 of 2006 vide judgment dated O7.O7.2OO8, against the appeilant-Al for the offence under Section B(c) r/w 22(a\ of N.D.P.S.Act, is confirmed. However, the sentence of 1S imprisonment imposed by the learned Sessions Judge modified to that of the period which the appellant-Al has already undergone, while maintaining the sentence of fine and the default conditions stipulated there urider.

¶28

With the above modification, the Crirninal Appeal IS partly allowed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶29

SD/-K.SRINIVASA^RAO JOTNTAEGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// cx) SECTION OFFICER

¶30

To, l.ThelAdditionalsessionsJudgeatMahaboobnagarDistrict(WithRecords) z. fne Suoerintendent, Central^{P-rioson, Chanchalguda,Hyderabad}

¶31

rne Stition House officer,^{Excise PoliceStation, Nagarkurnool,} Mahaboobnagar^District

¶32

a. One CC to SrIM.Damodar^{Reddy,Advocate (OPUC)}

¶33

s. i*o CCtto Public^{Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana} Hyderabad^(OUT)

¶34

Two CD^CoPies

¶35

One Spare Copy KS bsrNV-

¶36

HIGH COURT

¶37

DATED:1210712022

¶38

i-l i
.1.,C
0 1 lEP 2l]?2

¶39

JUDGMENT

¶40

CRLA.No.1091 of 2008

¶41

PARTLY,ALLOWING THE CRL.A.

¶42

0
m g\r-

M. Alliyanna Goud, v. the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Alliyanna Goud, v. the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Imail Mirza and Another Vs the State of A.P.

Sameer Haldar Vs The State of Telangana

G.Srinivas Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

Mrs. Vasam Ramana Bai, Vs Sri Karmathulla Khan

Malve Nagaraju, and Another, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd.

The State of Telangana Vs Bobbili Sai