State Of U.T vs Parminder Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 10414 P&H

   HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
                                  ****
231                    CRR-2464-2019
                       Date of Decision: 05.09.2022
                                  ****
State of UT                                          ... Petitioner
                                  VS.
Parminder Singh                                      ... Respondent
                                  ****
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
                                  ****
Present:    Mr. Deepinder Brar, Addl. PP, UT Chandigarh
                                  ****
Sandeep Moudgil, J. (Oral)

This criminal revision petition is directed against the judgment

dated 01.06.2019 passed by the Ld.Special Court, Chandigarh with a prayer

to modify the same and enhance the sentence awarded to the respondent,

suitably.

The respondent was apprehended with 210 grams of charas

which resulted in lodging of FIR No.142 dated 10.09.2017 under Section 20

of the NDPS Act, at Police Station IT Park, Chandigarh.

To prove its case, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses

however, no evidence was led by the respondent in his defence.

The contentions raised by the petitioner that the statement of the

police officials are not corroborated by an independent witness; Section 50(1)

of the NDPS Act was not complied with as he was not given opportunity to

be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate; the statements of the

prosecution witnesses was contradictory, apart from other loop-holes in the

manner of conducting the search, did not weigh much in the mind of the

Special Judge which held that the time, place and manner of recovery are in

consistent with the statements of the witnesses. Report Ex.P11 proved the

samples contained charas and ultimately, the respondent was held guilty and

1 of 3

convicted under Section 20 of the NDPS Act for keeping the charas without

any licence or permit. However, on the quantum of sentence, the trial court

after considering the fact that the respondent is not a previous convict, his

family background, and by giving an opportunity to the respondent to

improve, sentenced the respondent with imprisonment which he had already

undergone during trial from 10.09.2017 to 02.11.2017 and from 01.06.2019

to 03.06.2019 with a fine of Rs.10,000/-.

The present appeal has been filed by the State for enhancement

of the sentence awarded to the respondent.

The grounds of appeal is nothing but mere repetition of the

depositions of the witnesses much less without any contention on which the

enhancement is sought. The petitioner-UT Chandigarh, being a welfare State

is expected to take steps in the reformation of the youths who, due to

unemployment, poverty, poor family background and other social and mental

aspects, get involved themselves in such crimes unknowing the repercussions

of their activities. The sentence awarded by the Special Judge is only to give

an opportunity to the respondent to reform himself and come in the

mainstream in the society and become a good citizen. The learned Special

Judge has rightly held that 'the respondent is not a previous or hardcore

convict', against whom the State/UT should be so eager to walk to the Court

for enhancement.

No ground for interference much less enhancement of the

sentence awarded by the Special Court, to the respondent is made out.

2 of 3

Dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the petitioner-

UT in the Punjab and Haryana High Court Employees' Welfare Association

Fund within one month.

05.09.2022                                          (Sandeep Moudgil)
V.Vishal
                                                          Judge
1. Whether speaking/reasoned?                     Yes/No
2. Whether reportable?                            Yes/No




                                  3 of 3