Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Joginder Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 3 March, 2025
Author: Sudhanshu Dhulia
Bench: Sudhanshu Dhulia
1
ITEM NO.34 COURT NO.12 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s). 60689/2024
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-08-2022
in CRAS No. 3098/2015 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana
at Chandigarh]
JOGINDER SINGH Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF PUNJAB Respondent(s)
IA No. 18696/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING
Date : 03-03-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Prit Jha, AOR
Ms. Preeti Kumari, Adv.
Ms. Tamanna Swami, Adv.
Mr. Anurag Bansal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Karan Sharma, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
The petitioner has been convicted for the offence(s) punishable under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 19851 because psychotropic substance of commercial quantity was found in his possession.
At the time of issuing of notice, we had limited the issue to Signature Not Verified the quantum of sentence, for the reason that it was stated before Digitally signed by babita pandey Date: 2025.03.05 17:01:05 IST Reason: this Court that the quantity recovered was intermediate quantity 1 “1985 Act”, for short 2 and not commercial quantity and, therefore, the sentence which was liable to be imposed on the petitioner was under Sections 22(b) and not under Section 22(c) of the 1985 Act.
However, on perusal of the documents and the orders of the Court, we find that the petitioner was found in possession of various psychotropic substances including diphenoxylate hydrochloride, dextropropoxyphene hydrochloride, and paracetamol. The substance dextropropoxyphene hydrochloride was of a quantity that was less than commercial quantity, but greater than small quantity and hence, was of intermediate quantity. However, the substance diphenoxylate hydrochloride which was found in possession of the petitioner was of commercial quantity. Therefore, the minimum sentence in this case is ten years, which has been awarded.
Consequently, we see absolutely no reason to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.
(BABITA PANDEY) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR)
AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR