Ajay Kumar v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh CRA-S-551-SB-2003 (O&M) Date of Decision:-23.5.2024 Ajay Kumar ... Appellant

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S. SHEKHAWAT Present:- Mr. Karan Pathak, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Munish Sharma, DAG, Haryana.

***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J . (Oral) 1.

Appellant - Ajay Kumar assails judgment dated 18.2.2003 and order of sentence dated 19.2.2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, vide which he has been guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 25(1b) of Arms Act.

2.

The matter pertains to FIR No.349, dated 26.4.1998 registered at Police Station N.I.T. Faridabad, under Sections 25(54)(59) of Arms Act, wherein the allegations are broadly to the effect that the appellant was found in possession of a spring actuated knife without any licence. 3.

The Trial Court upon considering the evidence led before it held that the charges framed against the accused with respect to offence under Section 25(1b) stood fully established and accordingly while holding him guilty Pankaj Kakkar 2024.05.28 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRA-S-551-SB-2003 (O&M) ( 2 ) sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and also imposed fine amounting to Rs.500/-.

4.

Today, at the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he does not assail the findings of guilt, but has prayed that the sentence as imposed upon the appellant may be reduced particularly keeping in view the fact that the occurrence had taken place more than 26 years back. 5.

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned State counsel and also having perused the impugned judgment, this Court does not find any infirmity in the same and, as such, the same is hereby upheld. 6.

As far as the quantum of sentence is concerned, having regard to the fact that the occurrence had taken place long back i.e. more than 26 years back and the appellant as of now has already undergone total sentence of 2 months and 25 days out of the total imposed sentence of 6 months, the substantive sentence of imprisonment as imposed upon the appellant is reduced to the one already undergone. The fine imposed shall, however, remain unaltered. His bail bonds/surety bonds shall stand dischrged.

7.

The instant appeal stands disposed off accordingly. ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL ) JUDGE 23.5.2024 ( N. S. SHEKHAWAT ) Pankaj JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Pankaj Kakkar 2024.05.28 15:43 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document