Balwinder Singh v. State Of Punjab
103 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-1370-SB-2004 Date of Decision: April 03, 2025 Balwinder Singh alias Billu ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Rajat Dogra, Advocate for Ms. Nikita Goel, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Rajeev K. Takkar, DAG, Punjab.
DEEPAK GUPTA , J.(Oral) Appellant - Balwinder Singh alias Billu was tried by learned Judge, Special Court, Moga, in a case arising out of FIR No.48 dated 26.06.2002 under Sec1on 15(b) of the NDPS Act registered at Police Sta1on Mehna, as he was found in possession of 20 Kg of poppy straw. A6er trial, the appellant was convicted under Sec1on 15(b) of the NDPS Act vide judgment dated 26.05.2004 by the trial Court and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of ₹10,000/- with default sentence of 02 months rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine.
2.
Against the abovesaid convic1on and sentence, this appeal was filed.
3.
Today learned counsel for the appellant stated at the outset that appellant does not press the appeal against the judgment of convic1on; and that appellant confines his prayer only against order of sentence. It is submi<ed that appellant would be sa1sfied, in case he is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. 4.
Learned counsel points out that offence pertains to the year 2002; that appellant was young person of 36 years at that 1me; that appellant has already undergone actual sentence of almost 10 months, he deserves to be sentenced for the period already undergone by him. 5.
Learned State counsel has not seriously objected to the aforesaid prayer.
Sarita Rani 2025.04.03 19:12 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order
CRA-S-1370-SB-2004 - 2 - 2025:PHHC:045389 6.
As far as order of sentence is concerned, the custody cer1ficate placed on record by learned State counsel would reveal that the appellant has already undergone actual custody period of 09 months and 28 days, i.e. almost 10 months, out of total 02 years of sentence. At the same 1me, it is no1ced that appellant is also a convict in other cases of similar nature. 7.
Considering the fact that the offence was commi<ed way back in 2002 and appellant has already undergone actual custody of almost 10 months, the imprisonment period of the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant, but the fine of 10,000/- as imposed by the trial Court is hereby enhanced to 25,000/-. It is directed that the appellant shall pay the said fine of 25,000/- before the trial Court, deduc1ng 10,000/-, already imposed, if already paid, within a period of one month from today, failing which the appellant will have to undergo the remaining sentence as per order of the trial Court. Disposed of.
April 03, 2025 (DEEPAK GUPTA) sarita JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No Sarita Rani 2025.04.03 19:12 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order