DALWINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INITIALLY , there were four accused, namely, Dalwinder Singh( the present appellant), Satnam Singh alias Bittu, Pargat Singh alias Baggu and Sher Singh alias Sheru. Two accused, namely, Pargat Singh alias Baggu and Sher Singh alias Sheru were declared proclaimed offenders. Challan was presented against two of accused and they were convicted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 30.9.2004 for offence under Section 15 of NDPS Act,1985 and sentenced to undergo RI for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac each on 1.10.2004. Thereafter three separate appeals were filed by Dalwinder Singh, Satnam Singh and Pargat Singh alias Baggu before this Court i.e. Criminal Appeal No.S -920 -SB of 2005, Crl.Appeal No.S -845 -SB of 2005 and Criminal Appeal No.S -3155 -SB of 2009, respectively. All the said appeals were disposed of by one judgment dated 11.5.2010. The appeal filed by Satnam Singh alias Bittu was allowed and he was acquitted of the charges by giving benefit of doubt. Crl.Appeal No.S -920 -SB of 2005 and Crl.Appeal No.S -3155 -SB of 2009 filed by appellants Dalwinder Singh, Pargat Singh alias Baggu were dismissed.

(2.) ACCUSED Dalwinder Singh approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India by way of filing Crl. Appeal No.225 of 2012 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.4186 of 2011 and the judgment dated 11.5.2010 passed by this Court in Crl.Appeal No.S -920 -SB of 2005 was set aside with a direction to this Court for re -hearing of the appeal after giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellant. It was also mentioned that nothing was said as to the merits of the case and the matter is to be considered afresh. Briefly the facts of the prosecution version, which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are that on

(3.) THE present appellant Dalwidner Singh was not represented through any counsel at the time of hearing of the appeal and thereafter, he approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing an appeal which was allowed and judgment of this Court was set aside with the direction to re -hear the appeal after giving an opportunity of hearing.