Himachal Pradesh High Court
Nand Lal And Another vs . State Of Himachal Pradesh on 20 January, 2025
Nand Lal and another vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Criminal Appeal No.64 of 2025
20.01.2025 Present: Mr. Suneel Awasthi, Advocate, for the appellants.
Mr. Manish Thakur, Deputy Advocate General, for the
respondent/State.
Criminal Appeal No.64/2025
Notice. Mr. Manish Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate
General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the
respondent.
Admit.
Records be called for.
List for hearing in due course.
Cr.MP No.349/2025
The applicants-appellants have preferred the present
appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 17.01.2025, passed by the learned Special Judge, Shimla,
District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in Session Trial No.30-S/7 of
2023, titled State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Nand Lal and
another. The appeal filed raises arguable points. The applicants-
appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years each and also to
pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-each for an offence punishable under
Section 20 read with Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances Act. In default of payment of fine,
applicants/appellants were further directed to undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of three months each. The applicants/
appellants during the trial were enlarged on bail. They have not
misused the liberty accorded to them during the said period. The
sentence imposed, in the case at hand, is fixed term sentence. In
this respect it would be appropriate to refer to judgment dated
05.07.2024 passed in SLP(Criminal) Diary No.27298/2024, titled
Bhupatji Sartajji Jabraji Thakor Vs. The State of Gujarat. The
relevant extract is being reproduced herein below:-
“There is a fine distinction between a sentence imposed by
the trial court for a fixed term and sentence life
imprisonment. If a sentence is for a fixed term, ordinarily,
the appellate court may exercise its discretion to suspend
the operation of the same liberally unless there are any
exceptional circumstances emerging from the record to
decline. However, when it is a case of life imprisonment, the
only legal test which the Court should apply is to ascertain
whether there is anything palpable or apparent on the face
of the record on the basis of which the court can come to
the conclusion that the conviction is not sustainable in law
and that the convict has very fair chances of succeeding in
his appeal. For applying such test, it is also not permissible
for the court to undertake the exercise of re-appreciating the
evidence. The emphasis is on the word “palpable” and the
expression “apparent on the face of the record”.
Perused the record, there are no exceptional
circumstances emerging thereof necessitating declining of relief
as is being sought. For approximately 12 days, applicants have
been in custody w.e.f. 07.04.2023 to 18.04.2023. Thereafter,
they have been taken into custody w.e.f. 17.01.2025 and at
present they are in custody. Since the matter is admitted for
hearing, listing of the same is going to take some time, therefore,
the sentence in the case at hand, is ordered to be suspended and
applicants-appellants shall be forthwith released, subject to the
applicants’ depositing the entire fine amount, if not already
deposited, before the trial Court within four weeks from today and
also subject to their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned trial Court, undertaking therein that
appellants will attend this Court as and when required and in case
of dismissal of the appeal, they shall immediately surrender
before the learned Court to receive the sentence.
A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial Court with
the direction that the report of compliance of this order be
submitted to this Court within a period of six weeks. The
application stands disposed of.
( Bipin C. Negi )
January 20, 2025 (KS) Vacation Judge
[ad_1]
Source link