IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Crl. Misc. Application (C-482) No. 294 of 2010 Mandeep Singh S/o Ghasita Singh R/o Village Kalsa, P.S. Pehwa District Kurukshetra, Haryana. ...…………. Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home, Dehradun. ...…………. Respondent Mr. Navnish Negi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the respondent / State. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.), the petitioner has sought direction that the pre trial and post trial detention of the petitioner in connection with Criminal Case No. 2641 of 2008, relating to offence punishable under Section 60 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910, be set off against the sentence 2 awarded to him vide order dated 10.12.2008, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal. 3) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was apprehended in connection with possession and transportation of illicit liquor in the year 2002-03. After investigation charge sheet appears to have been filed against him, which was registered as Criminal Case No. 289 of 2003; State Vs. Kamal Kumar and others, for his trial along with other accused, in respect of offence punishable under Section 60 / 72 of the U.P. Excise Act, police station Devprayag. He was released on bail by the trial court, but after he absented during trial, his bail was cancelled in the year 2005. It appears that meanwhile he (petitioner) was arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 550 of 2004, relating to N.D.P.S. Act, registered at police Station Kaithal (Haryana). Under warrant ‘B’, he was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal, after his case was separated and registered as Criminal Case No. 1172 of 2008. He moved an application on 27.11.2008 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal, praying that he wants to confess his guilt, as he has already underwent 13 months imprisonment during investigation and trial in the aforesaid case of District Pauri Garhwal. On said application vide order dated 10.12.2008, petitioner Mandeep Singh was convicted under Section 60(1)(a) of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910, and sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years, and also directed 3 to pay fine of Rs. 29,23,200/-. It is further directed by the trial court that the convict shall undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months in default of payment of fine. 4) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner was convicted by the Karnal court in N.D.P.S. Act, and sentenced to imprisonment for ten years, but he has been directed to be released on bail in said case by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. It is further pleaded that the petitioner is in jail for more than five years. The only request made by the petitioner before this Court is that the period of 13 months which was spent by the petitioner in connection with the case decided by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal, be set off against the sentence awarded under Section 60 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910. 5) Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, provides that where an accused person has, on conviction, been sentenced to imprisonment for a term, not being imprisonment in default of payment of fine, the period of detention, if any, undergone by him during the investigation, inquiry or trial of the same case and before the date of such conviction, shall be set off against the term of imprisonment imposed on him on such conviction, and the liability of such person to undergo imprisonment on such conviction shall be restricted to the 4 remainder, if any, of the term of imprisonment imposed on him. 6) In view of the above provision of law contained in Section 428 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner is entitled to the set off of the period of 13 months which he has spent during investigation / trial in connection with the case decided vide order dated 10.12.2008 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal. However, he is not entitled to set off against the period of six months which he would be required to undergo in default of making the payment of fine. 7) For the reasons as discussed above, this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is disposed of with the direction that the period of 13 months spent by the petitioner in connection with the criminal Case No. 2641 of 2008; State Vs. Mandeep Singh, relating to offence punishable under Section 60 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910, decided by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal, on 10.12.2008, shall be set off against the period of imprisonment of two years awarded by said court. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. April 09, 2010. H. Negi 5