Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurdeep Singh Alias Kuldeep Singh vs State Of Punjab on 5 January, 2023
IOIN-CRM-M-60287-2022 -1-
236 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
IOIN-CRM-M-60287-2022 in
CRM-M-60287-2022
GURDEEP SINGH ALIAS KULDEEP SINGH
.....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB
......RESPONDENT
Present: Mr. Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate
for the petitioner.
*****
Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of receipt
No.3078 dated 04.01.2023, towards deposit of an amount in the High Court
Lawyers' Welfare Fund, to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-, in compliance with order
dated 22.12.2022, which is taken on record.
Prayer in the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been made
for modification of order dated 15.12.2022 (Annexure P-5), passed by the Court of
Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur.
Looking into the factual matrix of the case that the petitioner was
convicted vide judgement dated 09.12.2022 (Annexure P-2) for an offence under
Section 61(1) of the Punjab Excise Act. The quantum of sentence was ordered on
even date with simple imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 2 lacs.
Against the said judgment of conviction, Criminal Appeal No.192/2022
has been preferred before the Sessions Judge, Sangrur, alongwith an application
for seeking suspension of sentence and stay of fine.
However, perusal of the impugned order dated 15.12.2022 (Annexure P-
5) reveals that the sentence of the applicant/petitioner was ordered to be suspended
subject to the deposit of fine of Rs. 2 lacs within ten days as well as subject to the
furnishing the bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate within a period of 15
days.
It is the said order, which has been assailed terming the condition
stipulated therein for suspending the sentence by the Additional Sessions Judge,
1 of 2
Sangrur to be unreasonable and untenable in the eyes of law.
The order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur dated
15.12.2022 (Annexure P-5) is contrary to the basic principle of criminal
jurisprudence, wherein the pendency of appeal would amount to continuation of
trial and once the sentence of the appellant has been found prima facie, liable to be
suspended by the Lower Appellate Court, imposition of such condition of deposit
of the total fine amount of Rs. 2 lacs sounds unreasonable giving an impression
that suspension of sentence is for sale.
As far as the surety bonds are concerned, it needs not be interfered by
this Court. However, to show his bona fide, the petitioner has deposited a sum of
Rs. 50,000/- in the High Court Lawyers' Welfare Funds which, was imposed as
cost by this Court.
In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, without
commenting much on the merits of the case as appeal is yet to be adjudicated, the
present petition is disposed of with a modification of the order dated 15.12.2022
(Annexure P-5) that the sentence of the applicant-petitioner shall remain
suspended during the pendency of the appeal, subject to his furnishing of personal
surety/ bail bonds of Rs.50,000/- subject to the satisfaction of CJM, Sangrur.
The part of the order which relates to deposit of fine of Rs. 2 lacs shall
not operate any further.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
05.01.2023 JUDGE
Meenu
2 of 2
