Harjinder Singh vs State of Punjab

Inderjit Singh, J.—Harjinder Singh-applicant/appellant has filed this criminal miscellaneous application u/s 389(2) Cr.P.C. praying for suspension of sentence and releasing the applicant-appellant on bail during the pendency of above noted criminal appeal. Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant argued that the applicant is a licence-holder and the recovery effected from the applicant is non-commercial quantity.

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab opposed the application.

I have gone through the record and heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State.

The learned Special Judge, Ferozepur vide his judgment dated 1.10.2012 has stated that under the supervision of SMO, search of the shop and the house of the accused was conducted and they recovered 37 injections Fortwin, 90 capsules Parvon Spas, 90 tablets Sludinol, 1190 tablets Alprex, 99 x 100 packets of Microlit tablets, 99 x 100 injections Oxytocin, 802 capsules of Spasmo Proxivon, 2990 capsules Hipas, 7200 tables Microlit, 1170 capsules Declavet, 5890 tablets Alpra Zex, 390 capsules Parvon Spas, 42 injections of Bupanarphine.

The recovery from the accused is held as commercial quantity. The argument of the learned counsel for the applicant-appellant that only salt is to be counted and not the whole quantity, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, cannot be held has any force.

The applicant-appellant as per custody certificate has undergone only one year, four months and 23 days total custody. The applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years.

Without discussing the facts in minute detail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I do not find it to be a fit case where the applicant-appellant is entitled for the suspension of sentence.

Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon''ble Supreme Court in State of Uttaranchal Vs. Rajesh Kumar Gupta, . As this application is only for suspension of sentence, therefore, facts of the case cannot be discussed in minute detail and the findings of fact and law cannot be given in this application.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, I do not find any ground to release the accused (applicant) on bail by suspending his sentence in view of the recovery of commercial quantity from the shop as well as house of the applicant-appellant. Therefore, finding no merit in the criminal miscellaneous application, the same is dismissed.