NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J. - (1.) THIS is an application under Section 389, Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence on behalf of applicant-appellant No.2- Sukhmander Singh @ Mander Singh, during the pendency of the appeal.
(2.) CUSTODY certificate produced by learned counsel for the State is taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant submits that the alleged recovery was 53 kg and 500 grams of poppy husk and the weight of the two gunny bags has not been excluded. In case, the weight of two gunny bags is excluded, then it comes to non- commercial quantity. The FIR was registered on the basis of secret information. Against the total sentence of R.I for ten years, applicant- appellant No.2 has undergone more than two years of actual sentence and appeal is of the year 2010, which may take some time in final conclusion. Learned counsel has also relied upon the judgments of this Court in Gurlal Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2003 (3) RCR (Criminal) 198; Darshan Singh @ Darshi vs. State of Punjab, 2004(4) RCR (Criminal) 505, and Sikander Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2005(2) RCR(Criminal) 810 in support of his contention. He further contends that co-appellant-Jaswinder Singh @ Chhida had already been granted the benefit of suspended sentence by this Court vide order dated 08.02.2012.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the State opposes the suspension of sentence but does not controvert the period of undergone by applicant- appellant No.2.;