Partly allowed

Jang Sher Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Sept 2012CRA-S/2461/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that in a revision petition under Section 18 NDPS Act, the appellant's age and long delay justified reducing the sentence to time already served while enhancing the fine to Rs.30,000, subject to immediate release upon payment.

What did the court decide?

Sentence reduced to period already undergone; fine enhanced to Rs.30,000. Appellant released if fine paid.

Jang Sher Singh Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRA No.S-2461-SB of 2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRA No.S-2461-SB of 2012

¶5

Date of Decision: September 17, 2012

Jangsher Singh

... Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab

... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH

¶12

Present: Mr. P.K. Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant.

¶13

Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

¶14

¶15

Paramjeet Singh, J.

¶16

The present appeal has been preferred by Jangsher Singh, who was nominated as an accused in case FIR No. 533 dated 07.11.2008, registered at Police Station Sadar, Patiala, under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the “NDPS Act”). The learned Judge, Special Court, Patiala vide the impugned judgment dated 16.08.2012 found the appellant guilty of offence under Section 18 of NDPS Act and vide the order of even date, sentenced him to

¶17

CRA No.S-2461-SB of 2012 2

¶18

undergo RI for eight months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default whereof, he was to undergo further RI for one month.

¶19

I need not dilate upon the facts of this case in detail as the same have already been recapitulated in the judgment of the learned Trial Court and in view of the ultimate prayer of the appellant seeking reduction in sentence.

¶20

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶21

On being confronted with the quality of evidence available on the record, which is cogent and convincing and leads to no other conclusion but the conviction of the appellant, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he will not be able to successfully challenge the conviction of the appellant. However, he prays that the sentence of the appellant be suitably reduced as this criminal trial is hanging on his head like Damocles' sword for the last about four years and it should be a sufficient mitigating circumstance to treat him leniently. Counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the FIR pertains to the year 2008 and since then a period of about four years has elapsed. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant is 79 years old.

¶22

Custody certificate is produced in the Court and the same is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, appellant has already undergone 01 month and 21 days.

¶23

In view of the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant, which have been noted above, this Court is of the view that no

¶24

CRA No.S-2461-SB of 2012 3

¶25

useful purpose will be served by sending the appellant behind the bars at this point of time as the appellant is an old man of 79 years. It is a fit case wherein sentence awarded to the appellant can be reduced to the period already undergone and the appellant can be burdened to pay compensation. Therefore, sentence is reduced to the period already undergone in the present case. However, the fine imposed upon the appellant is enhanced to Rs.30,000/-. It is, however, made clear that the appellant shall be released on payment of Rs.30,000/- and if not required in any other case. The impugned order of sentence and conviction stands affirmed with aforesaid modification. If the amount is not deposited, the appellant will serve the remaining part of sentence as ordered by the learned Trial Court.

¶26

With the observations made above, present revision petition is disposed of.

¶27

September 17, 2012 [Paramjeet Singh] vkd Judge

Jang Sher Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jang Sher Singh 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

Hatte Singh Vs State of Haryana

Harish Goyal & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Gurbir Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Kala Singh Vs State of Punjab

Jaswant Singh Vs Stateof Pb

Vikas Sabharwal and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others