##PAGE1##

(cid:1) CRA-S-1483-SB-2012 (O&M) 1 (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)

(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

220 CRA-S-1483-SB-2012 (O&M)

Date of decision: 07.04.2026

Sukhvinder and Another ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY *****

Present : Mr. Rajbir Singh, Advocate for the appellants

Mr. Gautam Kaile, DAG Haryana *****

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

1. By way of the present appeal, the appellants have challenged the judgment/order dated 04/07.04.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, whereby they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years alongwith fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of the same, to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months, for the offence punishable under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and

Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the Act’).

2. In a nutshell, the facts reveal that on 23.12.2010, ASI Om Parkash along with other police official were present on Hisar-Rajgarh road, in connection with patrolling duty, they saw two young boys coming from the Rajgarh side, while carrying bags and on suspicion, they were apprehended and after informing them about their rights, a search was conducted, leading to recovery of 12.000 kgs of Chura post from the petitioner-Sukhvinder, while 8.000 kgs of doda post from the petitioner-Kaka Singh. Thereafter, the samples

MOHIT

2026.04.09 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

(cid:1) CRA-S-1483-SB-2012 (O&M) 2 (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)

(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)

were drawn and sealed. A ruqa was sent, based on which the FIR was

registered.

3. Upon conclusion of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted before the Court. Finding a prima facie case, the Court framed charge under Sections 15 & 16 of the Act, to which the accused pleaded

not guilty and sought trial.

4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 7 witnesses and the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. pleading not guilty, when the incriminating evidence was put to them and

alleged false implication.

5. The learned trial Court after hearing the learned counsel for the

parties, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants as noticed above.

6. Hence, appellant in appeal.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants, at the very outset, does not wish to challenge the conviction, but prays for reducing the sentence to the period already undergone, it being 3 months and 11 days, in view of the quantity of recovered contraband that was only 12.000 kgs of Chura post and 8.000 kgs of doda post, which is marginally above the small quantity and falls in “intermediate quantity”; they are not involved in any other case under this Act; belong to the poor strata of society; never misused the concession of bail

and have been facing the agony of protracted trial for the last 25 years.

8. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, submits that the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants based on the evidence led by the prosecution and adequately awarded the sentence, requiring no interference,

thus, prays for the dismissal of the present appeal.

MOHIT

2026.04.09 18:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

(cid:1) CRA-S-1483-SB-2012