Vicky v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-907-SB of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.07.2015 Vicky ....Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH Present: - Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. D.S. Mann, AAG, Punjab.

***** PARAMJEET SINGH, J. (ORAL) Challenge in this appeal is to judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 09.02.2015 passed by learned Judge, Special Court, Fazilka, whereby appellant has been held guilty under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 21⁄2 years and to pay fine of ` 7,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

I need not dilate upon the facts of this case in detail as the same have already been recapitulated in the judgment of the Court below and in view of the ultimate prayer of the appellant seeking reduction in sentence.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

-2Learned counsel for the appellant states that he is not pressing this appeal on merit and is not challenging the conviction on merit. He is only aggrieved against the sentence part. However, he prays that the sentence of the appellant be suitably reduced as this criminal trial is hanging on his head like damocle's sword for 21⁄2 years and it should be a sufficient mitigating circumstance to treat him leniently. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the FIR pertains to the year 2013 and since then a period of 21⁄2 years has elapsed. The appellant has suffered the ordeal for a sufficient period and now he is a reformed person. Appellant has already undergone sentence for more than one year.

Learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the reduction in sentence.

Ancient penological approach was custodial measure to curb crime. But in modern days, penological approach should be balanced keeping in view the needs of the community and interests of the accused: such as compensation to the victims, release on admonition, probation etc. These are being adopted to reform the criminal convicts. The object of criminal justice system is to reform the offenders and to make them see and follow the right path. Otherwise also jails are often overcrowded.

The appellant is stated to have been released on bail in pursuance of the order dated 16.07.2015 passed by this Court in CRM No.9846 of 2015.

-3In view of the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellant, which have been noted above, and the fact that appellant has already undergone sentence for more than one year, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by sending the appellant behind bars further as the appellant faced ordeal for a sufficient period and has also undergone about half of the sentence. It is a fit case wherein sentence awarded to the appellant can be reduced to already undergone. Ordered accordingly. The impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, including default clause, stand affirmed except for the aforesaid modification in sentence. It goes without saying that if the amount of fine is not deposited, the appellant will serve the remaining part of sentence.

With the observations made above, the present appeal is disposed of.

(Paramjeet Singh) Judge July 22, 2015 R.S.