Ajaib Singh vs State of Punjab

Heard learned counsel for the parties. The criminal miscellaneous application has been filed seeking suspension of sentence of imprisonment of the applicant/appellant-Ajaib Singh during the pendency of the appeal.

On 17.05.1994 SI Gurmit Singh along with other police officials were going in a vehicle being driven by Constable Satnam Singh towards village Malla and Rasulpur in connection with patrolling. When they were at the chowk of Gurudwara Mehdiana, Ashok Kumar alias Shoki met them by chance. In the meantime a special informer informed SI Gurmit Singh by taking him aside that Ajaib Singh (applicant/appellant) and Ajmer Singh alias Chhoto sons of Jagta Singh residents of Rasulpur were in the habit of keeping in their possession ''bhooki choora post'' for sale and if a raid was conducted the contraband in heavy quantity could be recovered. The information was found credible and amounted to commission of an offence punishable u/s 15 of the NDPS Act. A memo (Ex. PD) was prepared against the accused Ajaib Singh and Ajmer Singh. It was sent to the Police Station, Jagraon through Constable Darshan Lal for registration of a case. SI Gurmit Singh along with police officials proceeded to the place that was disclosed by the special informer. On the raid that was conducted Ajmer Singh was found present while Ajaib Singh (applicant/appellant) escaped from there. On inquiry Ajmer Singh made a disclosure statement (Ex. PE) that he and his brother Ajaib Singh (applicant/appellant) had kept 20 bags of poppy husk concealed in the room of the residential house of Ajaib Singh (applicant/appellant). In pursuance of the said disclosure statement, 20 bags of poppy husk were recovered. Samples of 250 grams were taken from each of the bags and the contraband that was recovered was weighed. Each bag was found to contain 30 kgs of poppy husk. Ajmer Singh was apprehended at the spot. However, Ajaib Singh (applicant/appellant) had escaped. He was arrested on 04.06.2005 and a supplementary challan was filed against him on 16.08.2005. The learned Judge Special Court, Ludhiana after considering the evidence and material on record has convicted the applicant/appellant for the offence u/s 15 of the NDPS Act. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twelve years; besides, pay a fine of Rs. 1.5 lacs and in default thereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year and six months.

Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant has submitted that the applicant/appellant has undergone six years of imprisonment of which fifteen months is after conviction; besides, there is no other case against him. Therefore, he is covered by the guidelines laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Daler Singh Vs. State of Punjab, It is also submitted that he was not arrested at the spot.

In response learned counsel for the State has submitted that the applicant/appellant was found in possession of six quintals and ten kilograms of poppy husk which was recovered from his house; besides, he has been a proclaimed offender and was arrested on 04.06.2005. Therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the matter. The case involves arguable points which would require condition.

In terms of the affidavit dated 11.03.2013 of Shri Surinder Pal Khanna, Superintendent Central Jail, Ludhiana, the applicant/appellant has undergone imprisonment of five years, ten months and eleven days as on 09.03.2013. As on date he has undergone six years of imprisonment which includes imprisonment of three years, eight months and thirteen days after conviction. In Daler Singh''s case (supra) it was held by a Division Bench of this Court that where a convict is sentenced for more than ten years for having in his conscious possession commercial quantity of contraband, he shall be entitled to bail if he has already undergone a total sentence of six year, which must include at least fifteen months after conviction. Therefore, indeed the said guidelines have been met in the present case. As per affidavit that has been filed there is no other case pending against him. He availed the concession of parole for a period of four months and twenty days during his incarceration and it is not shown that he misused the concession of parole that was granted to him. Therefore even though the applicant/appellant has been a proclaimed offender yet he has not misused the concession of parole. The appeal is not likely to mature for hearing in the near future; besides, the applicant/appellant was not arrested at the spot. Therefore in the facts and circumstances, it would be just and expedient to suspend the sentence of imprisonment of the applicant/appellant-Ajaib Singh during the pendency of the appeal. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous application is allowed and the sentence of imprisonment of the applicant/appellant-Ajaib Singh during the pendency of the appeal shall remain suspended subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana.