The High Court
Case Details
CRA-S-2390-SB SB-2011 (O&M) - 1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ IN T AT CHANDIGAR PUNJAB & HARYANA IGARH 228 Narender ryana State of Haryana (O&M) CRA-S-2390-SB-2011 (O&M .2025 Date of decision: 31.10.2025 Versus ....Appellan pellant ...Responden pondent CORAM: HON
Legal Reasoning
report in terms of Section 173 Cr.P.C. The Court, upon finding a prima facie case, proceeded to frame charge under Section 20 of the Act. The accused, however, pleaded not guilty and insisted on trial. 4. Prosecution in support of its case examined 11 witnesses after which the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein the accused denied incriminating evidence, while pleading innocence and alleged false implication. 5. The learned trial Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant as noticed above. 6. 7. Hence appellant in appeal. The challenge to the conviction is given up by the learned counsel, who now confines his prayer for reduction of sentence to the period of 1 year, 6 months and 27 days, already undergone by the appellant, on the grounds that he is a first offender; only bread earner of the family; belongs to the poor strata of society; has old age mother and father having passed away; not involved in any other case and has been facing the agony of protracted trial since 2009. 8. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that the trial Court after evaluating the evidence has rightly convicted the appellant and the sentence awarded to him cannot be said to be excessive, therefore, he prays for the dismissal of the present appeal. He, however, was unable to deny that appellant, during pendency, committed no similar offence. 9. 10. Counsel on either side heard and the record perused. Evidently, EASI Rajender Singh and PW10-SI Shri Krishan had deposed that the accused appellant was apprehended and found to be in conscious possession of the alleged contraband. As per FSL report Ex.PA/2, contents of the contraband were opined to be Charas. The delay in sending the sample is not fatal ASHOK KUMAR 2025.10.31 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-S-2390-SB-2011 (O&M) - 3- for prosecution as it was never tampered with and was intact. There is no scope for interference in the findings recorded by the trial Court as the recovery has been proved on credible official testimony, and immaterial discrepancies due to lapse of time. As such, his conviction is upheld. 11. On the issue of reduction of sentence to the period already undergone, the judgment in S.K. Sakkar @ Mannan vs. State of West Bengal, (2021) 4 SCC 483, can be referred to, wherein the accused was convicted under Section 20 of the Act and Hon’ble the Supreme Court reduced the sentence of five years to 2 years, 4 months and 16 days, by considering that the occurrence took place in 1997 and he was not a habitual offender, rather a first-time convict. 12. In Satish vs. State of U.P., (2021) 14 SCC 580, Hon’ble the Supreme Court had observed that, “Whilst it is undoubtedly true that society has a right to lead a peaceful and fearless life, without free roaming criminals creating havoc in the lives of ordinary peace loving citizens. But equally strong is the foundation of reformative theory which propounds that a civilised society cannot be achieved only through punitive attitudes and vindictiveness; and that instead public harmony, brotherhood and mutual acceptability ought to be fostered. Thus, first time offenders ought to be liberally accorded a chance to repent their past and look forward to a bright future. [Maru Ram v. Union of India, (1981) 1 SCC 107 : 1981 SCC (Cri) 112]”. 13. Likewise, in Naresh Kumar vs. State of Haryana, CRA-S-796-SB- 2005, decided on 24.02.2023, the sentence of the appellant i.e. 3 years and 6 months, convicted under Section 15 of the Act, was modified to the period undergone i.e. 8 months and 25 days already, by holding that no useful purpose will be served by sending him to jail after 22 years from the date of incident, in view of the fact that he was only about 28 years old at that time. ASHOK KUMAR 2025.10.31 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-S-2390-SB-2011 (O&M) - 4- 14. Whilst adopting a sympathetic approach; the appellant having suffered the vagaries of trial since long; successfully warded off his crime-proneness-an evident learning of a lesson; his socio-economic circumstances, this Court finds mitigating factors apparent. Thus, it would serve the ends of justice to reduce his sentence to the period already undergone, however, keeping the fine intact. 15. The order of sentence dated 14.07.2011 is modified to the aforesaid extent and as such, the present appeal stands partly allowed. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 31.10.2025 ashok Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes / No Yes / No ASHOK KUMAR 2025.10.31 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Arguments
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN MAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present : Mr. Mr. Rahul Vats, Advocate for the ap the appellant. Mr. RK Jangra, AAG, Haryana. Mr. ***** AMAN CHAUD AUDHARY, J. (Oral) 1. Challenge in the present appeal i Chal peal is to the judgment/order date r dated 13/14.07.2011, p , passed by the learned Specia Special Court, Rohtak, whereby th by the appellant was co as convicted and sentenced to under undergo rigorous imprisonment for t for 3 years alongwith with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in defa in default of payment of the same, t ame, to further undergo r ergo rigorous imprisonment for six m months, for the offence punishabl ishable under Section 20 ion 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psy nd Psychotropic Substances Act, 198 t, 1985 (for short ‘the Ac the Act’). 2. Briefly, the facts are that on 31.12.2 Brief .2008, when EASI Rajender Sing r Singh alongwith other other police officials was present at Stand, ent at Gate No.2 of New Bus Stand Rohtak, for patro r patrolling duty and they apprehende hended the accused in possession of on of 1 kg. of charas. The . The requisite samples were drawn a rawn and sealed. Ruqa was sent, on th , on the basis of which, an ich, an FIR was registered. After the investigation concluded, After luded, the police submitted the fina e final 3. ASHOK KUMAR 2025.10.31 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-S-2390-SB-2011 (O&M) - 2-