IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 103 CRA-S-2172-SB-2004 Date of Decision.:23.05.2025 Kashmiri Lal …..Appellant Vs. State of Haryana .….Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. Ashwani Verma, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. R.K.S. Brar, Addl. AG, Haryana. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Appellant Kashmiri Lal was tried by learned Addi%onal Sessions Judge, Panipat in a case arising out of FIR No.112 dated 14.05.2002 under Sec%on 15 of the NDPS Act registered at Police Sta%on Sadar, Tohana. A3er trial, the appellant Puran Mal was convicted under Sec%on 15(b) of NDPS Act vide judgment dated 16.10.2004 by the trial Court and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of ₹10,000/- with default sentence of 03 months rigorous imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine. 2. Against the abovesaid convic%on and sentence, this appeal was filed. 3. Today learned counsel for the appellant stated at the outset that appellant does not press the appeal against the judgment of convic%on; and that appellant confines his prayer only against order of sentence. It is submi>ed that appellant would be sa%sfied, in case he is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. 4. Learned counsel points out that offence pertains to the year 2002; that appellant has already undergone total sentence of 02 months and 12 days and is not involved in any other case and so, he deserves to be NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.05.23 17:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-S-2172-SB-2004 -2- sentenced for the period already undergone by him. 5. Learned State counsel has not seriously objected to the aforesaid prayer. 6. The custody cer%ficate placed on record by the respondent- State would reveal that appellant Kashmiri Lal has already undergone total sentence of 02 months and 12 days. It is revealed further that he has no criminal antecedents. Nothing has been brought on record to suggest that a3er his convic%on, appellant has been involved in any other case. 7. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it will be in the interest of jus%ce, if the period of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant, instead of sending him behind bars in the company of hardened criminals. 8. Consequently, the present appeal is partly accepted. By maintaining the impugned judgment against convic%on, the order of sentence as passed by the trial Court is modified and the appellant is sentenced to imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. 9. However, it is made clear that amount of fine, if not paid earlier, shall be deposited before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned, within a period of four weeks’ from today, failing which the appellant will have to carry out the complete sentence as imposed by the trial Court. Disposed of. ( DEEPAK GUPTA ) JUDGE May 23, 2025 Nee%ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.05.23 17:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document