Jwahar Lal v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH **** CRA-S-18-SB-2009 (O&M) Date of Decision.:04.03.2025 Jwahar Lal @ Kaka .....Appellant Vs.
State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Ms. Raageshwari, Advocate for Mr. S.S. Behl, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. AG, Haryana.
**** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Appellant Jwahar Lal @ Kaka was tried by Ld. Special Judge, Ambala in a case arising out of FIR No.23 dated 19.01.2004 under Sec2on 15 of the NDPS Act registered at Police Sta2on Parao, as he was found in possession of 8 Kg of poppy husk. A6er trial, the appellant was convicted under Sec2on 15 of the NDPS Act vide judgment dated 18.12.2008 by the trial Court and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of ₹1,000/- with default sentence of 02 months rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine. 2.
Against the abovesaid convic2on 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 convic2on; and that appellant confines his prayer only against order of sentence. It is submi=ed that appellant would be sa2sfied, in case he is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.03.05 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRA-S-18-SB-2009 (O&M) -24.
Learned counsel points out that offence pertains to the year 2004; that appellant was young person of 24 years at that 2me; that appellant has already undergone actual sentence of 02 months and 07 days and is not involved in any other case and so, he deserves to be sentenced for the period already undergone by him.
5.
Learned State counsel has not seriously objected to the aforesaid prayer.
6.
The custody cer2ficate placed on record by the respondentState would reveal that appellant has already undergone actual custody sentence of 02 months and 07 days. It is revealed further that he has no criminal antecedents. Nothing has been brought on record to suggest that a6er this convic2on, appellant has been involved in any other case. He was young boy of 24 years of age at the 2me of offence, which had taken place way back in 2004 i.e. 21 years back.
7.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it will be in the interest of jus2ce, if the period of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant, instead of sending him behind bars in the company of hardened criminals.
8.
Consequently, the present appeal is partly accepted. By maintaining the impugned judgment against convic2on, the order of sentence as passed by the trial Court is modified and the appellant is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. Disposed of.
( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE March 04, 2025 Nee2ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.03.05 10:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document