TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Punjab and Haryana High Court calls for year-wise details of persons in custody

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

Pendency of appeals in cases of drugs

Advertisement

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 1

Just about a month after the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed the initiation of an exercise to find out the pendency of matters of drugs before it, a Division Bench has called for year-wise details of persons in custody during the pendency of their appeal. The move is liable to expedite the hearing of appeals filed by the state against acquittal orders and the convicts against their conviction in the drugs cases.

Advertisement

The Bench of Justice Ajay Tewari and Justice Pankaj Jain observed that the HC Registry, in accordance with directions earlier issued in the matter, had provided year-wise list of pending cases. “We, however, feel that it would be apposite to require the Registry to get the year-wise details of the persons, who remained in custody during the pendency of the appeal,” the Bench said.

The Bench was hearing a bunch of applications in criminal appeals filed against the Narcotics Control Bureau by Bhupender Singh and other appellant-convicts through counsel Navkiran Singh, Shaveta Sanghi, Aditya Sanghi and other advocates.

The direction to the Registry to collate year-wise information on the pending appeals under the NDPS Act came after the Bench was told that appellants before it in drugs cases had undergone substantial part of the sentence. However, their appeals were yet to be heard.

The Bench observed that the convicts were seeking suspension of sentence on the preliminary ground that they had undergone a substantial part of the sentence, but the appeals had not been heard.

“It has been suggested by the counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant-appellant, the amicus curiae and the state counsel that before considering this issue, it would be appropriate if statistics are summoned regarding the total number of pending appeals (year-wise) in this court. We are in agreement with the suggestion,” the Bench said.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement