Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2853 (PNJ)

Shinder Pal v. State of Punjab

2017-11-30

MAHESH GROVER, RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI

body2017
ORDER : 1. Custody certificate has been filed. Same is taken on record. 2. This is an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C., 1973 praying for suspension of sentence of applicant-appellant Shinder Pal son of Nirmal Singh, who has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act and 10 years under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, in case FIR No.125 dated 30.09.2013, registered under Sections 15/29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act at Police Station Rahon, District SBS Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that there would be a debatable issue that whether the applicant could be sentenced under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substances Act under the given circumstances of the prosecution case. Apart from that, it is contended that he has been convicted for ten years under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, similarly, under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act without their being any comment upon the order of running the sentence concurrently, which would imply a sentence of 20 years for being in possession of 54 Kgs. of poppy husk, which would be extremely harsh. It is further contended that the applicant has already undergone 02 years 02 months and 21 days and there is no other case against him under the provisions of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act. 4. Learned State counsel opposed the prayer but admits the period of custody and the fact that there is no other case of the like nature against the applicant. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and noticing the quantity of poppy husk recovered from the applicant, as also the sentence of 20 years, we are of the opinion that the applicant would have a debatable issue to be argued at the time of hearing of the appeal both on the question of sentence as well as on the question of conviction under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act. 6. 6. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case but noticing these facts, as also the period of custody undergone by the applicant and the fact that the applicant is not involved in any other case of the like nature, coupled with the fact that the appeal is of the year 2016 and is not likely to be heard in near future, the application is allowed and applicant Shinder Pal son of Nirmal Sings is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, SBS Nagar. 7. Nothing said hereinabove shall be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.