Anand Tiwari v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No.S-975-SB of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 07, 2017 Anand Tiwari ...Appellant

VERSUS

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Ms.Prabhjeet Kaur, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr.Parveen Aggarwal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against State of Haryana, challenging the judgment of conviction dated 17.01.2017 and order of sentence dated 20.01.2017 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ambala, whereby the appellant was held guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of `10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months each under Section 15 of the NDPS Act.

The brief facts of the prosecution case as noted down in the judgment passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ambala, are as under:- "2. Prosecution case as unfolded by the report/complaint of the complainant ASI Balwant Singh, wherein he had stated that

-2on 08.02.2004 he alongwith other police officials was on patrolling duty near Nandhra Hospital, Ambala Cantt. One person was seen coming from the side of Civil Hospital and he was having a bag on his right hand and another bag on his left hand. On seeing the police party, he turned back and started walking briskly. On suspicion, he was apprehended and on search, Poppy Husk was recovered from both the bags and on weighment, it was found 20 kg. Poppy Husk.

On the basis of this complaint, formal FIR of the present case was registered. During the investigation, accused was arrested and was taken into custody. After completion of necessary formalities of investigation report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted against the accused for trial." On presentation of challan against accused-appellant, copies of challan and other documents were supplied to him under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Finding prima facie case, the accused-appellants was chargesheeted under Section 15 of the NDPS Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

In support of its case, prosecution examined PW-1 DSP Raj Gopal, PW-2 ASI Kartar Singh, PW-3 EHC Ranbir Singh, PW-4 Inspector Randhir Singh, PW-5 EASI Ramesh Kumar, PW-6 Head Constable Khushi Ram and PW-7 ASI Balwant Singh.

At the close of prosecution evidence, the accused-appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He was confronted with the evidence of the prosecution and he denied the correctness of the evidence and pleaded himself as innocent and their false implication in the present case. No witness was examined in defence.

The learned trial Court, after appreciation of the evidence, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants as stated above. At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant did not dispute the findings regarding conviction and only prayed for reduction

-3of sentence of the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that poppy husk weighing 20 kgs. has been recovered from the accusedappellant, which falls under non-commercial quantity. He also contended that the appellant is sole bread earner of the family and is suffering from criminal proceedings since 2004. Learned counsel for the appellant next contended that appellant has already undergone 1 year 8 months and 11 days of actual sentence.

On the other hand, learned State counsel argued that case of the prosecution has been duly proved by the PWs. There is nothing on the record to show false implication of the accused in the present case. He next argued that PWs have consistently deposed regarding the recovery from the accused. Learned State counsel, therefore, argued that there being no merit, the present appeal should be dismissed.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. In view of the evidence, I find that the prosecution has duly proved its case by leading cogent evidence beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the judgment of conviction dated 17.01.2017 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ambala, is correct, as per law and does not require any interference from this Court.

However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and in view of the fact that appellant is stated to be sole bread earner of the family and suffering from long protracted criminal proceedings since 2004 i.e. for the last about 13 years and further in view of the fact that appellant has already undergone actual sentence of 1 year 8 months and 11 days and keeping in view the fact the recovery from the accused-appellant

-4falls under non-commercial quantity i.e. 20 kgs. poppy husk, the sentence imposed upon the appellant is reduced to the sentence already undergone by him. However, the sentence of fine and in default thereof, shall remain the same.

Accordingly, present criminal appeal stands partly allowed. Appellant Anand Tiwari, who is in custody, be set at liberty forthwith, if his custody is not required in connection with any other case, subject to payment of fine.

July 07, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No