AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.N. Jindal, J.—The accused-Appellant Puran Singh (hereinafter referred to as the `Appellant'') was slapped with sentence of 10 years and
a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- for keeping in possession 3 KG opium by Judge, Special Court, Patiala vide his judgment dated 25.11.2003.
In nutshell the allegations against the Appellant are that on 17.11.2000 Inspector Jassa Singh along with other police officials was present at bus
stop of village Sarsini where he received secret information against the Appellant that he was indulging in sale of narcotics and he could be
apprehended red handed in the area of villages Jaraut and Jharmari police station, Lalru which was his area of sale and consequently, a naka was
affixed; the accused was arrested; 3 kg. opium was recovered from him; sample was taken out after completing of the formalities, the sample so
sent to the chemical examiner was found to be of opium. On completion of investigation a report u/s 173 Code of Criminal Procedure was
presented against him.
He was consequently, charged to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The case is based on the testimony of Jassa Singh, investigator
and constable Paramjit Singh (PW-1). The accused made complete denial in his statement u/s 313 Code of Criminal Procedure Ultimately trial
ended in conviction.
Heard.
No illegality or such defect has been pointed out in the impugned judgment so as to disturb the findings regarding the conscious possession of
contraband with the Appellant. The provisions of Section 50 are not applicable as the opium was recovered not from the person of the Appellant
but from the bag carried by him. As such the judgment of conviction cannot be interfered with.
As regards the solitary argument regarding the quantum of sentence, it may be observed that the Appellant is not a previous convict. The
quantity recovered is marginally higher than the commercial quantity. The overweight appears to have been mentioned for want of the proper
weighment. He is a young man of 30 years, having wife and children. He has already undergone 4 years of the substantive sentence.
Thus taking the aforesaid circumstances in view, the appeal is dismissed with the modification in the sentence reduced to 5 years a a fine of Rs.
10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months.