Punjab-Haryana High Court
Amir Lal vs State Of Haryana on 6 May, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062663
237 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
2024:PHHC:062663
CRM-44811-2023 in/and
CRA-S-3054-2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision: May 06, 2024
Amir Lal ... Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Present:- Mr. Navneet Singh, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.(Oral)
Although, the application bearing No.CRM-44811-2023 for
suspension of sentence is listed today, but on oral request of learned counsel
for the appellant, the main appeal i.e. CRA-S-3054-2023 is taken on Board
today itself for hearing.
2. By way of present appeal, the appellant challenged his
conviction and sentence as recorded by the Trial Court in case FIR No.76
dated 12.02.2020, registered at Police Station Farakpur, District Yamuna
Nagar, under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
Act, 1985. The impugned judgment dated 11.10.2023 passed by learned
Addl. Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar, would reveal that the appellant has
been convicted under Section 20 of the NDPS Act for keeping in his
conscious possession 13.5 Kg. of poppy husk. Vide an order dated
12.10.2023, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
period of 02 years and also to pay a fine of `10,000/- with default sentence
of 01 month.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062663
2024:PHHC:062663
CRM-44811-2023 in/and CRA-S-3054-2023
3. Today, statement is made by learned counsel for the appellant,
so as to withdraw the appeal against conviction. The limited prayer made by
learned counsel for the appellant is to modify the order of sentence and to
sentence the appellant for the period already undergone by him. It is pointed
out by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant's age is 75 years;
that he has already undergone sentence of 09 months and that he is a first
time offender.
4. Learned State counsel has no serious objection to the prayer
made by learned counsel for the appellant.
5. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the
appellant, the present appeal against impugned judgment of conviction dated
11.10.2023 is dismissed as withdrawn.
6. Coming to the impugned order of sentence, it is noticed that the
age of the appellant has been recorded to be 74 years at the time of
registration of the FIR, i.e. April, 2020, which means that by now his age
would be 78 years. The custody certificate would reveal that the appellant
has already undergone the actual sentence of 08 months and 29 days, i.e.
almost 09 months out of 02 years imposed upon him. It is further reported
that the appellant is not involved in any other criminal case and thus has
clean antecedent.
7. Having regard to the old age of the appellant, the fact that he
has no criminal antecedent and that he has almost undergone 09 months of
sentence, this Court considers that period of sentence already undergone by
the appellant is sufficient to meet the ends of justice. Therefore, the
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062663
2024:PHHC:062663
CRM-44811-2023 in/and CRA-S-3054-2023
impugned order of sentence as passed by the Trial Court is modified and the
appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. However, the
amount of fine shall remain as it is. As such, it is directed that on deposit of
fine before the Trial Court concerned, the appellant be released with
immediate effect. However, it is made clear that in case, amount of fine is
not paid, the appellant will have to undergo default sentence of 01 month as
imposed by the Trial Court.
Disposed of.
The pending application(s), if any also stand(s) disposed of.
May 06, 2024 (DEEPAK GUPTA)
sarita JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
