Ajmira Bibi vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 4211 Cal

Court No.                       C.R.A. 189 of 2021

item 4                            CRAN 1 of 2021
ssi

11.08.

In Re: An application for suspension of sentence 2021 Petition of Appeal under Section 389 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

In the matter of :- Ajmira Bibi

Mr. Anand Keshri Mr. Sekhar Mukerjee Mr. Gaurav Kumar ...for the appellant

Mr. Ranabir Roy Chowdhury

...for the State

This is an application for suspension of sentence in

connection with appeal being CRA No. 189 of 2021 as per

the provision of Section 389 (2) of the Criminal Procedure

Code, 1973, whereby and whereunder a judgment and

order dated 18.02.2021 passed by the learned Additional

District and Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Special Judge,

Alipore in connection with S.T. Case No. 2 (7) 2017 under

Section 21 (B) of the NDPS Act, 1985, convicting the

appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six years

and a fine of Rs. 50,000/- in default of payment of fine to

undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the

offence punishable under Section 21 (B) of the NDPS Act,

1985 has been assailed.

Mr. Anand Keshri, learned advocate for the

petitioner/appellant submits for suspension of sentence

on the ground that the petitioner appellant has been

falsely implicated in connection with this case for the

reasons best known to the Investigating Officer. It is also

submitted that the alleged quantity of narcotic substance

recovered from the possession of the present appellant is

below commercial quantity and intermediate in nature

and there are good grounds in the appeal and every

chance of success in the appeal as because the learned

Trial Judge failed to apply his judicial mind at the time of

consideration of the materials on record. The allegations

leveled against the petitioner herein are illogical false,

fictitious and without any substance. It is submitted that

due to the present situation of the outbreak of Pandemic

Covid-19, it is quite impossible that the appeal shall be

concluded in the near future. There is no chance of

conclusion of the appeal in the near future. Keeping in

mind the present crisis, there is a high chance of

exposure of the petitioner appellant to the infection

COVID-19 pandemic in the correctional home. It is argued

that Hon'ble Supreme Court has directed that considering

the present situation of pandemic, the petitioner's safety

and security has to be kept in mind and hence the

application for bail has been filed for consideration

keeping in mind the Golden rule of liberty enshrined in

Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner

appellant has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for

six years and a fine of Rs. 50,000/- in default to undergo

simple imprisonment for six months. It is pointed out that

the petitioner is a quinquagenarian lady suffering from

different medical ailments.

Mr. Ranabir Roy Chowdhury, learned advocate

appearing for the State, present before this Court

adverting to the provision of Section 436A of the Code of

Civil Procedure submits that it is the discretion of the

Court to consider the release of the petitioner appellant as

the petitioner has already undergone for a period of 4

years 8 months out of six and years of punishment.

Reference to a decision in case of Kashmira Singh -

vs- The State of Punjab reported in 1977 (4) SCC 291 is

made to contend that it would be justified to release the

appellant on bail where the Court is not in a position to

dispose of the appeal expeditiously. It has been observed

that no practice howsoever sanctified by usage and

hallowed by time can be allowed to prevail if it operates to

cause injustice. Every practice of the Court must find its

ultimate justification in the interest of justice, bail a

person who has been sentenced to life imprisonment was

evolved on the basis that once a person has been found

guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment, he should not

be let loose, so long as his conviction and sentence are

not set aside, but the underlying postulate of this practice

was that the appeal of such person would be disposed of

within a measurable distance of time, so that if he is

ultimately found to be innocent, be would not have to

remain in jail for an unduly long period. The rational of

this practice can have no application where the Court is

not in a position to dispose of appeal of an accused within

a reasonable period of time, the Court should ordinarily

unless there are cogent grounds for acting otherwise,

release the accused on bail in cases where special leave

has been granted to the accused to appeal against his

conviction and sentence.

I have taken into consideration the submissions on

behalf of both the parties, particular Mr. Keshri, who has

pointed out that in this pandemic situation, it is not

possible for the Court to take the appeal instantly for its

disposal as there are good grounds of appeal. It is

understood that the petitioner appellant has suffered

considerable period of sentence by now and bearing in

mind the provision of Section 463A of the Code of

Criminal Procedure and the quantity of heroine seized in

the case, this Court is inclined to release the petitioner on

bail till the disposal of appeal or until further order.

Accordingly, the petitioner shall be released on bail

upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand

only) with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom

must be local to the satisfaction of the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Alipore and further on condition that

she would appear before the Special Court in that case

once in a month to record her attendance in default

learned Special Court be at liberty to cancel the bail

without further reference to this Hon'ble Court.

Thus, application being CRAN 1 of 2021 is disposed

of.

Requisite number of paper books be made ready

within six months from date.

All parties shall act in terms of copy of this order

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Shivakant Prasad, J.)