Gian Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 20.05.2025 Gian Singh ...Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE


Present :

Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate, for Mr. S. S. Gill, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. H. S. Wadhwa, DAG, Punjab.

****


, J. (Oral) 1.

This present appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.01.2012 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Patiala, whereas, appellant had been convicted in case arising out of the FIR No.49 dated 06.04.2008 under Section 18 of the NDPS Act, Police Station Julkan, Patiala, and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000 and in default thereof RI for 3 months. 2.

 

  

        

 
 



       ! "#$%%

&

&!  



!    '  

  

(   '  ! 

!&#)  '

    without any valid permit or

licence. The accused was proceeded accordingly. Pursuant thereto, vide order dated 07.01.2012 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Patiala, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo aforesaid imprisonment. * +         

          

 

,     %- %" #%"#   

 

& (       ( 

  

 &  !& 

 !  &

 

  "& %- .%-&      %*&  &    / 0  1



&  23(  

 & #%%4  

 -*&   &! 5

  !& 

6  '      



& 



 !&&    &

   "7 %8 #%#8     

!  , 

!



  !   8  The appellant has been convicted for having in possession of 2 )  '

  attracting the offence of Section 18 of the NDPS Act, for which no minimum punishment has been prescribed. Moreover, the FIR in the present case pertains to the year 2008 and he has already faced the rigors of the trial for about 17 years.

9                

    

       -  1! 



:
    



     

 &  ; <  

=  !!& 

        &=   

5     5  &       

     !   ( 

 =

   !  !

& &  =     

  ! !  

  

 & 

    <= &    

4 

  =>    1?!



   !  ""#$  $$%%  =     

  

!&5=       &  !



 &   
   

 

 

    !     !< !& = 

    !&  

        

    =   

5!!   &      =      7  A perusal of the judgment of conviction passed by the learned trial Court indicates no perversity in its findings and the same is based on correct appreciation of evidence available on record. However, learned counsel for the appellant has not assailed the judgment of conviction on merits, rather restricted the prayer only qua modification of quantum of sentence to that of the sentence already undergone by the appellant.

"%  Since the FIR in the present case was registered on 06.04.2008 and the appellant has been suffering the agony of trial for the last 17 years. Since there is no minimum punishment prescribed under Section 18 of the NDPS Act and keeping in view the fact the FIR is of the year 2008 and the appellant has faced the rigors of the trial for more than a period of 17 years and therefore, while taking a lenient view, this Court is of the opinion that it would be in the interest of justice if the sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to the period already undergone by him. ""   !



  !&



,     %- %" #%"# !&   

0       %- %" #%"# 

<     

     %*&  

 

       &  = !& 1       

 

   

(
 )

 20.05.2025 anil Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No