Surinder Singh @ Pammi and Another vs State of Punjab

K.C. Puri, J.—Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 6.9.2011 passed by Ms. Sunita Kumari Sharma, Judge, Special Court, Kapurthala, vide which the accused-Appellants have been convicted u/s 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as ''the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act), along with other co-accused, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment as under.

Surinder Singh @ Pammi and Jagbir Singh were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of 15 days for offence u/s 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

As per case of the prosecution, on 8.4.2005, SI Sarwan Singh along with police party had conducted special Nakabandi at ''T'' point Razapur in connection with checking. A secret information was received that accused Surinder Singh @ Pammi, Nanu Mal, Jagbir Singh and Sukhwinder Singh @ Babu were coming towards Kapurthla from Sultanpur Lodhi by their Maruti Car bearing No. DL-9CJ-8339 along with opium in their possession. The said Maruti car was stopped. Surinder Singh and Jagbir Singh had managed to escape, whereas remaining two accused Sukhwinder Singh and Nanu Mal were apprehended on the spot. Accused Nanu Mal and accused Sukhwinder Singh were asked that they were suspected for having some contraband in their possession and whether they wanted to get their search conducted in presence of Gazetted Officer or Magistrate. Both of them expressed their desire to get their search conducted before the Gazetted Officer. DSP Daljinder Singh Dhillon reached the spot and disclosed their identity. From the search of Nanu Mal 500 grams of opium was recovered and 500 grams of opium was recovered from Sukhwinder Singh. That was converted into separate parcels.

On 10.4.2005, SI Sarwan Singh along with other police officials apprehended Surinder Singh @ Pammi and Jagbir Singh at Dhariwal Octroi Post, Jalandhar. Gurdip Singh was joined as independent witness. 250 grams of opium was recovered from each of them on their disclosure statement from the disclosed place in the presence of DSP.

Challan was presented against the accused and documents as provided u/s 207 Code of Criminal Procedure. were supplied to them and thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

Charge u/s 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act was framed against the accused, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

The prosecution, in order to bring home guilt of the accused examined PW-1 HC Ram Lal, PW-2 SI Surinder Pal, PW-3 Constable Kulwinder Singh, PW-4 HC Rajeshwar Dutt, PW-5 DSP Daljinder Singh, PW-6ASI Karamjit Singh, PW-7 Inspector Sarwan Singh Bal and closed the prosecution evidence.

The accused were examined u/s 313 Code of Criminal Procedure. and all the incriminating evidence was put to them, to which they denied.

The accused in their defence evidence examined DW-1 Ramesh Kumar, TMO Telegraph office, Kapurthala, DW-2 Ishwar Singh, DW-3 HC Manjit Singh and closed their evidence.

Learned trial Court after appraisal of the evidence, found the accused guilty u/s 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and Sukhwinder Singh and Nanu Mal were held guilty for having been found in possession of 500 grams of opium each without any licence or permit. Whereas Jagbir Singh and Surinder Singh @ Pammi, the present Appellants, were held guilty for having been found in possession of 250 grams of opium each, without any licence or permit and consequently, the present Appellants were sentenced to undergo imprisonment and fine as narrated above.

Feeling dissatisfied with the above said judgment and order dated 6.9.2011, the accused-Appellants Surinder Singh @ Pammi and Jagbir Singh have preferred the present appeal.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant has not challenged the conviction recorded by the trial Court, but has submitted that accused are facing trial for the last more than 6 1/2 years. They have undergone incarnation for a period of 2 months. So, prayer has been made for reduction of sentence.

I have carefully considered the submission made by counsel for the Appellants and have also gone through the record of the case.

As per the conviction slip Surinder Singh @ Pammi and Jagbir Singh remained in custody for 1 month and 28 days as on 3.10.2011, out of substantive sentence of 3 months. The conviction recorded by the Judge, Special Court, does not suffer from any infirmity. So, the conviction recorded by the Judge, Special Court, stands affirmed. However, keeping in view the fact that Appellants are facing trial for the last more then 6 1/2 years and that they have undergone about 2 months incarnation out of substantive sentence of 3 months, their sentence stands reduced to the period already undergone by them. However, the sentence of fine awarded by the trial Court stands affirmed.

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

A copy of the judgment be sent to the trial Court for compliance.