Disposed

Maninder Kaur @ Sandeep v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC15 Dec 2011CRA-S/3197/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge High Court disposed of an appeal against a conviction under Section 15 of the NDPS Act. While not assailing the conviction, the appellant argued for sentence reduction. The Court reduced the sentence to six months rigorous imprisonment and granted discharge as the appellant had already undergone that period. Appeal disposed.

What did the court decide?

Sentence reduced to 6 months rigorous imprisonment with discharge as term already undergone; appeal disposed.

Maninder Kaur @ Sandeep Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Criminal Appeal No. 3197-SB of 2011

¶2

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh

¶4

Criminal Appeal No. 3197-SB of 2011

¶5

Date of Decision: 15.12.2011

¶6

Maninder Kaur alias Sandeep

... Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab

... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

¶12

Present: Mr. Dinesh Nagar, Advocate for the appellant.

¶13

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral)

¶14

Issue notice of motion.

¶15

On asking of the Court, Ms. Sonia Dhillon, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. A copy of appeal has been supplied to her.

¶16

The appellant has filed the present appeal to assail the impugned judgment dated 18.10.2011, passed by the Judge, Special Court, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, whereby she has been held guilty of offence under Section 15 of the Narcotic Substances & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), in the case arising out of FIR No. 486 dated 31.7.2008, registered at Police Station Behram. Vide a separate order of even date, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months

¶17

Criminal Appeal No. 3197-SB of 2011

¶18

¶19

and to pay a fine of ` 1,000, in default whereof to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month.

¶20

Mr. Dinesh Nagar, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the appellant, at the outset, has submitted that he will not assail conviction of the appellant as he has nothing in his arsenal except to point out discrepancies, improvements and contradictions in the testimonies of the official witnesses. He further submits that he is convinced that the discrepancies, to be pointed out, are not such that the appellant will be entitled to acquittal. However, learned counsel has submitted that mere 10 Kgs. of poppy husk has been recovered from possession of the appellant, which is a non-commercial quantity. He further submits that the appellant, as on 15.12.2011, has undergone 3 months & 7 days, out of her actual sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment. He has placed on record a custody certificate, issued by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Patiala. As per the certificate, relied upon by learned counsel, the appellant is not involved in any other case.

¶21

Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that indeed age, quantity recovered and antecedents of the appellant are taken by the Courts as mitigating circumstances and sentence is their discretion.

¶22

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the mitigating circumstances, so divulged by the appellant, ought to be given due consideration by it.

¶23

Accordingly, sentence of 6 months rigorous imprisonment, awarded upon the appellant, for the offence under Section 15 of the Act, is reduced to that of already undergone.

¶24

Criminal Appeal No. 3197-SB of 2011

¶25

¶26

With the modifications in the sentence, awarded upon the appellant, the present appeal is disposed of.

¶27

(Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge

¶28

December 15, 2011

¶29

“DK”

Maninder Kaur @ Sandeep v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maninder Kaur @ Sandeep v. State of Punjab

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

Baljit Kaur Vs State

Sushil Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Rajender Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Munshi Ram Vs State of Punjab

Jaswant Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Rattan Lal Vs State