Kuldeep Singh @ Sandeep vs State of Punjab

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2137

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARKESH MANUJA, J.
Kuldeep Singh @ Sandeep – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRA-S-3768-SB of 2016
Decided On : 01-05-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate; For the Appellant
For the Respondent: Mr. Vinay Kumar Gupta, AAG, Punjab.

Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 21 - Conviction and sentence for possession of non-commercial quantity of contraband - Appellant convicted and sentenced by trial court; appeal restricted to reduction of sentence only - Relevant judgments considered regarding reformation and public harmony in sentencing - No prior offenses or cases against the appellant, already served 4 months of the sentence. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Reformatory theory in sentencing - The court emphasized that a civilised society must balance punitive approaches with opportunities for reform and rehabilitation for first-time offenders, recognizing the potential for future change in individuals. (Paras 9-11)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for possessing 150 grams of smack based on evidence from FIR No.162 of 26.09.2012 and sentenced to one year imprisonment with a fine. The appeal concerned the duration of the sentenced served.

Findings of Court:
The conviction was affirmed while the sentence was reduced to the time already served based on various relevant precedents, with the fine increased to Rs.20,000.

Issues: The main issue addressed was the justification for the reduction of sentence considering the nature of the contraband, the appellant's history, and relevant case law regarding reformative justice.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed the conviction due to absence of evidential infirmity but acknowledged that reducing the term to time served aligns with principles of reformative justice as the appellant had shown no prior criminal behavior and the contraband was of non-commercial quantity.

Result: Appeal partly allowed; sentence modified.

Table of Content
1. conviction under ndps act confirmed. (Para 1 , 2)
2. appellant seeks reduction of sentence. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court finds merit in reduction of sentence. (Para 5 , 6)
4. reformatory theory considered for sentencing. (Para 7)
5. sentence modified and appeal dismissed. (Para 8)

JUDGMENT

Harkesh Manuja, J.

By way of present appeal, challenge has been made to the judgment of conviction dated 30.09.2010 and order of sentence dated 03.10.2016 passed by the court of learned Judge Special Court, Patiala, whereby, appellant was convicted under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- or in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month.

2. Facts of the case are that the appellant was arrayed as accused in FIR No.162 dated 26.09.2012, under Section 21 of the NDPS Act, 1985 registered at Police Station Sadar, Patiala, for having possessed 150 grams of smack. On the basis of the evidence recorded, learned trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned in para 1 of this judgment, vide judgment and order dated 30.09.2016/03.10.2016.

3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he restricts his prayer only to the reduction of sentence awarded and does not challenge the judgment of conviction. It is contended that out of a period of one year of his sentence, he has already undergone actual sentence of 04 months, out of 01 year. He further submits that there is no other case registered against the appellant and the contraband recovered from the appellant is of non-commercial quantity.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made on behalf of the appellant for reduction in the sentence.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book, I find substance in the submission made on behalf of the appellant regarding reduction of sentence.

6. On perusal of judgment passed by the court below, I am of the considered view that the trial court has rightly appreciated the evidence on the record while holding the appellant guilty of the charge framed against him. There is no infirmity or illegality in the findings given by the Court below. Therefore, the conviction of the appellant is, thus, affirmed.

7. Even the counsel for the appellant has not assailed the judgment of conviction and has pleaded for reduction of quantum of sentence, to the period already undergone while referring to the judgments passed by this Court in CRA-S-660-SB-2005, titled as "Lakhwinder Kumar v. State of Punjab" decided on 03.03.2023, " Mohinder Singh v. State of Punjab " , 2018(2) Law Herald 1678 and " Rajinder Singh v. State of Punjab ", 2019(4) RCR (Criminal) 711. Paras No.9 to 11 of Lakhwinder Kumar's case (supra) are relevant, which are reproduced hereunder:-

"9. On the issue of reformatory theory in context to any wrong doer, His Lordship V.R. Krishna Iyer, J., of Hon'ble Apex Court, in case titled as "Mohammad Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1977) 3 SCC 287, has observed as under:-

"5. If every saint has a past, every sinner has a future, and it is the role of law to remind both of this. The Indian legal genius of old has made a healthy contribution to the word treasury of criminology. The drawback of out criminal process is that often they are built on the bricks of impressionist opinions and dated values. Ignoring empirical studies and deeper researches."

(emphasis added)

10. In case titled as "Satish @ Sabbe v. State of Uttar Pradesh (Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.7369 of 2019, decided on 30.09.2020), His Lordship Surya Kant, J., says as:

"Whilst it is undoubtedly true that society has a right to lead a peaceful and fearless life, without freeroaming criminal creating havoc in the lives of ordinary peace loving citizens. But equally strong is the foundation of reformative theory which propounds that a civilised society cannot be achieved on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document