Partly allowed

Kuldip Singh Alias Bittu v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC30 May 2013CRA-S/1719/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal against conviction and sentence for an offence under the NDPS Act, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana condoned a delay of 21 days, held that the appellant's case was fit for mitigation as the trial had hung over him for over five years, and reduced the sentence to the period already undergone while enhancing the fine.

What did the court decide?

Sentence reduced to period undergone; fine enhanced to 20,000; appellant released upon deposit of fine.

Kuldip Singh Alias Bittu Vs State of Punjab — Narcotics (NDPS) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Crl. Appeal No. S-1719-SB of 2013

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Appeal No. S-1719-SB of 2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 30.05.2013

¶5

Kuldip Singh alias Bittu

....Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab

....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH

¶11

Present: - Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. P.S. Bajwa, DAG, Punjab.

¶12

¶13

PARAMJEET SINGH, J. (ORAL)

¶14

Crl. Misc. No.26595 of 2013

¶15

For the reasons stated, crl. misc. application is allowed. Delay of 21 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶16

Crl. Appeal No. S-1719-SB of 2013

¶17

This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against judgment of conviction dated 22.2.2013 and order of sentence dated 23.2.2013 passed by learned Special Judge, Ferozepur, whereby the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of ` 5,000/- for the commission of offence punishable under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psycotropic Substances Act and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.

¶18

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

¶19

-2-

¶20

Crl. Appeal No. S-1719-SB of 2013

¶21

Courts below and in view of the ultimate prayer of the petitioner seeking reduction in sentence.

¶22

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

¶23

Learned counsel for the appellant states that he is not pressing this appeal on merit and is not challenging the conviction on merit. He is only aggrieved against the sentence part. However, he prays that the sentence of the appellant be suitably reduced as this criminal trial is hanging on his head like damocle's sword for about 5 ½ years and it should be a sufficient mitigating circumstance to treat him leniently. Counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the occurrence pertains to the year 2008 and since then a period of about 5 ½ years has elapsed. The appellant is a first offender and has suffered the ordeal for long period.

¶24

Learned counsel for the State does not dispute these facts.

¶25

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 useful purpose will be served by keeping appellant behind the bars further. It is a fit case wherein the sentence awarded to the appellant can be reduced to the period already undergone and in lieu thereof fine can be enhanced to from 5,000/- to 20,000/-. Ordered accordingly. It is, however, made clear that the appellant, who is stated to be in judicial custody, shall be released on deposit of enhanced fine and if not required in any other case. The period of sentence will stand reduced to undergone upto the date of actual release, as aforesaid. The impugned order of sentence and conviction, including default clause, stands

¶26

-3-

¶27

Crl. Appeal No. S-1719-SB of 2013

¶28

affirmed with aforesaid modification. It goes without saying that if the amount of fine is not deposited, the appellant will serve the remaining part of sentence.

¶29

With the observations made above, present appeal is disposed

¶30

of.

¶31

(Paramjeet Singh) Judge

¶32

May 30, 2013 R.S.

Kuldip Singh Alias Bittu v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldip Singh Alias Bittu 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

Yashpal Aggarwal and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Yashpal Aggarwal and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Jasbir Singh @ Jass Vs State of Punjab

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Daljit Singh Gujral Vs Jagjit Singh Arora and Others

Jagdip Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab