IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No.216 of 2009. Decided on 26.5.2011 Pale Ram ..…Appellant. Versus State of H.P. …. Respondent. ___________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant : Mr. V.S. Rathore, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Dy. A.G. V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral) The appellant (convict) is in appeal against the judgment/order dated 30.4.2009 passed by the learned Special Judge, Fast Track Court, Kullu, H.P, in Sessions Trial No.10 of 2008, State Vs. Pale Ram, whereby he was tried for the offence under Section 20 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ( in short ‘The Act’ ) and was ultimately convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of ` 20,000/- and in default to suffer further simple imprisonment for six months. 2. The learned counsel for the convict submits at the very outset that the appellant was arrested on the date of the occurrence itself i.e. 6.10.2006. He was ordered to be released on bail by this Court vide order dated 3.11.2006, 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2 passed in CRMP (M) No.647 of 2006, Pale Ram vs. State of H.P. Thus, he had suffered incarceration for 29 days at pre trial stage. This aspect of the matter is also borne out of the records. 3. The impugned judgment/order of conviction and sentence were passed on 30.4.2009. Since then the convict is stated to be undergoing sentence for the last two years and twenty six days. Thus, he has already undergone the substantive sentence of two years. However, since he belongs to a very poor background, he could not pay the amount of fine of ` 20,000/- and is still suffering imprisonment in default. Out of six months simple imprisonment ordered against the convict by the learned trial Court in default of payment of fine, the convict has already undergone sentence for one month and twenty five days. 4. In view of the above and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am more than satisfied that ends of justice would be squarely met in case six months simple imprisonment ordered against the convict by the learned trial Court in default in payment of fine is converted into the one already undergone. Ordered accordingly. Consequently, the convict is ordered to be released from custody and set free to his liberty, unless he is not required in any other process of law. The 3 appeal stands disposed of, in the above terms. (V.K. Sharma) Judge May 26, 2011. cs