CRA No.374-SB of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB &
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
CRA No.374-SB of 2009 (O&M)
Date of decision: 01.04.2009
Fateh Singh ...Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA
Present: Mr. B.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab.
Rajan Gupta, J.
The appellant in this case has been convicted by the Special
Court, Barnala for possession of 5 Kgs of poppy husk. He has been
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a
fine of Rs.1000/- and in default thereof to further undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of one month.
The present appeal has been filed challenging the judgment
aforesaid passed by the Special Court, Barnala.
Learned counsel for the appellant at the outset submits that
he does not challenge the conviction of the appellant and he confines his
prayer to reduction of sentence of the appellant. He further contends
that since there is no minimum punishment prescribed in the statute, the
sentence may be reduced to that already undergone by the appellant.
Learned counsel for the State submits that in case the
conviction of the appellant is maintained, he shall have no objection to
CRA No.374-SB of 2009 2
reduction of sentence. He agrees that no minimum punishment is
prescribed in the statute for recovery of contraband which is non-
commercial in nature. He has produced the Custody Certificate issued
by the Deputy Superintendent, Sub Jail, Barnala, according to which
the appellant has undergone 2 months & 14 days as on 23.3.2009.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
In view of the fact that the learned counsel for the appellant
has not challenged the conviction and has limited his prayer to reduction
of sentence, I am of the considered view that his sentence may be
reduced to that already undergone by him.
Even otherwise, on scrutiny of the evidence of the
prosecution witnesses, I am of considered view that the appellant has
been rightly convicted by the trial court. Thus, conviction of the
appellant is maintained.
However, in view of the fact that there is no other case
pending against the appellant, the quantity of contraband recovered is
more than small quantity but less than non-commercial and he appears
to be a first offender, it is directed that sentence of the appellant shall be
reduced to that already undergone by him and fine is maintained as
such.
The present appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(RAJAN GUPTA)
JUDGE
April 01, 2009
‘rajpal’
CRA No.374-SB of 2009 3