IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Appeal No. 43-SB of 2002 Date of decision: 26th March, 2009 Sukhwant Singh … Appellant Versus State of Punjab … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Ms. Gagangeet Kaur, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General Punjab for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present appeal has been filed by Sukhwant Singh aged 33 years resident of village Bhutal Kalan, Police Station Moonak. He has been convicted by the Judge, Special Court, Sangrur under Section 15 of the NDPS Act for having in possession 25 kg and 500 gm of poppy husk, which is less than commercial quantity. He was sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Appellant was convicted on 5th December, 2001. Therefore, he was given benefit of amendment, whereby commercial and non- commercial quantities were recognized and different sentences were prescribed. On 3rd July, 1999, police party, headed by SI Jasbir Singh, was proceedings towards village Amru Kotra for patrol duty. When they Criminal Appeal No. 43-SB of 2002 reached near Jakhepal Chowk, Sunam, one Sikander Singh came present and he was joined in the police party. The appellant was found sitting on a gunny bag near the drain of the pit. On seeing the police party, accused appellant tried to run away but he was apprehended. Two samples of 250 gm each of poppy husk were prepared. On weighment, poppy husk was found to be 25 kg. Therefore, in all 25 kg and 500 gm poppy husk was recovered from the appellant. Prosecution examined SI Jasbir Singh as PW-3, HC Najar Singh as PW-4. PW-1 Moharar Head Constable Sukhchain and PW-2 Constable Harbans Singh tendered their affidavits (Ex.P-A and P-B respectively). They were examined prove link evidence. Statement of the appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was also recorded. He denied all incriminating circumstances and pleaded false implication. In defence, he examined DW-1 constable Jaswinder Singh and DW-2 Joginder Singh. Trial Court held the recovery to be chance recovery and further held that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses aspire confidence. An argument was raised that Sikander Singh PW was stock witness of the police. In the present case, Sikander Singh has not been examined as witness. I have read the evidence of prosecution witnesses. They aspire confidence. DW-2 Joginder Singh has stated that on 2nd July, 1999 police had arrested him and SI Jasbir Singh was the Investigating Officer and Sikander Singh was witness against him. Joginder Singh was acquitted by the Court of Special Judge, Sangrur. Certified copy of the order was placed on record as Ex.D-6. Appellant cannot draw any benefit out of the acquittal of DW-2 Joginder Singh. In the present case, recovery was effected on 3rd July, 1999. Appellant has suffered a protracted trial for more than nine years. He 2 Criminal Appeal No. 43-SB of 2002 was sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment. He was taken into custody on 5th December, 2001. He was ordered to be released on bail by this Court on 22nd February, 2002. The appellant has undergone actual sentence of 2 months and 17 days. Counsel for the State is unable to state whether appellant, during the pendency of the appeal, has been convicted for any other offence under the NDPS Act or not. Taking into consideration protracted trial and the fact that right of speedy trial vest in the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, I am of the view that ends of justice will be fully met in case, sentence awarded upon the appellant is reduced to already undergone. With these observations, present appeal is disposed off. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE March 26, 2009 rps 3