Criminal Appeal No. 693-SB of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No. 693-SB of 2009
Date of decision: August 4, 2009
Ranjit Singh @ Buta -Appellant.
Versus
State of Punjab -Respondent
Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajan Gupta
Present: Mr. DR Singla, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. Shilesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab.
Rajan Gupta, J.(Oral)
The appellant has been convicted vide judgment/order dated
12.2.2009 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of
three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment thereof to
further undergo RI for 3 months by the Judge, Special Court, Barnala for
being in possession of 35 kgs 500 grams of poppy husk, which was being
kept by him on the back seat of scooter bearing registration No. PB 19-3287
without any licence or permit.
Learned counsel for the appellant states that he is limiting his
prayer only to the extent of reduction in the sentence awarded and does not
assail the judgment of conviction.
Learned State counsel, on the other hand submits that in case
conviction of the appellant is maintained, the Court may reduce the
sentence as deemed appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 14-07-2007, the police
Criminal Appeal No. 693-SB of 2009 2
intercepted the appellant coming on a scooter with a gunny bag on rear seat.
On seeing the police party, he got perplexed and tried to turn back his
scooter. He was apprehended on suspicion. After following the necessary
formalities, search of the bag in possession of the accused was conducted.
This led to recovery of the aforesaid contraband.
During trial, the prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses
in support of its case and produced report of Chemical Examiner Exhibit
PF.
The statement of the accused was recorded in terms of Section
313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein the incriminating evidence
available on record was put to him. He pleaded innocence and claimed false
implication in this case. He examined one witness in his defence.
On the basis of the evidence on record, the trial Court came to
the conclusion that the appellant was guilty of the offence punishable under
Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, having
been found in possession of the contraband in question.
On a perusal of the judgment, I am of the considered view that
the trial Court had correctly arrived at a conclusion that the appellant was
guilty of the offence alleged against him. The conviction of the appellant is,
thus, affirmed.
Even counsel for the appellant, during the course of arguments,
has not assailed the judgment of conviction. He, however, pleaded for
reduction in the quantum of sentence on the ground that the appellant is a
first offender, a poor man having his wife, two unmarried daughters and
two unmarried sons. He is sole bread winner of the family.
Learned State counsel has placed on record a reply by way of
Criminal Appeal No. 693-SB of 2009 3
affidavit dated 1.8.2009 of Deputy Superintendent, Sub Jail, Barnala,
according to which the appellant had undergone 6 months & 28 days of
sentence as on 1-8-2009.
Keeping in view the fact that the appellant is a first offender, a
poor man and sole bread earner in the family, I deem it fit to reduce his
sentence to RI for one year. However, the sentence of fine shall remain the
same. Ordered accordingly.
The amount of fine if not already paid, shall be deposited
within a week of receipt of copy of this judgment, failing which the
appellant shall undergo further RI for 3 months.
Except with the modification in the quantum of sentence, as
indicated hereinabove, the appeal is dismissed.
[Rajan Gupta]
Judge
August 04, 2009.
‘ask’