HARBANS SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the record of the case.

(2.) THE only submission raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner may be visited with leniency in the matter of sentence as the sample was taken on 14.8.1984 and since then the petitioner is suffering the vagaries of the criminal proceedings.

(3.) THE point for determination would be whether the sentence (less) than the minimum prescribed under the Act can be granted to a person who has been convicted for the offence of adulteration. This point came up for consideration before this High Court in Chander Bhan v. State of Haryana, 1996(1) Recent CR 125, where it was observed that though such convict is not entitled to be released under the Probation of Offenders Act, yet if the convict suffers the agony of the criminal proceedings for several years, then keeping in view the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India qua the right of the accused to a speedy trial, judicial compassion can play a role and a convict can be compensated for the mental agony. Reliance was placed on Ishwar Singh v. State of Haryana, 1994(1) Recent C.R. 160 and Nand Lal v. State of Haryana, 1992(1) Recent C.R. 82. In para No. 7 of the judgment his Lordship was pleased to observe as follows :-