Pawan Tomar vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1516 Chatt

               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                 Order Sheet

                            CRA No. 303 of 2021

1. Pawan Tomar, S/o Shri Veerpal Tomar, Aged about 26 years, R/o Village
   Saamli, P.S. Bhojpur, District- Gaziyabaad (U.P.).

2. Sonu, S/o Dharampal Singh, Aged about 31 years, R/o Village Pilkhava,
   District Hapur (U.P.).

3. Raju @ Rahul, S/o Naresh Kumar, Aged about 20 years, R/o Village
   Khairpur, P.S. Pilkhava, District Hapur (U.P.).

4. Bapi, S/o Ravinder Patnayak, Aged about 23 years, R/o Village Dusiya, P.S.
   Pattamundai, District Kendrabaad (Odisha).

                                                                  ---- Appellants

                                   Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh, Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Borai,
  District- Dhamtari (C.G.).

                                                                ---- Respondent

02.08.2021 Ms. Sharmila Singhai, Senior Counsel appears along with

Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, counsel for the Appellants.

Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Dy. A.G. for the State/Respondent.

Heard on I.A. No. 01/2021, application for suspension of

sentence and grant of bail to the appellants.

By the impugned judgment dated 27.02.2021 passed in

Special Criminal Case (N.D.P.S Act) No. 127/2018 by the Special

Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Dhamtari (C.G.) the appellants stands convicted as mentioned below:

     Conviction             Sentence               In Default

u/S 20(b)(II)(B) of RI for 07 years and In     default    of
the N.D.P.S. Act    fine amount of Rs. payment of fine
                    50,000/-.           amount additional
                                        RI for 06 months.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the

appellants have been wrongly convicted by the trial Court in the

judgment without there being any sufficient evidence available on

record. Both the seizure witnesses i.e. Hiteshwar Dhruv (PW-02)

and Sonraj Kosre (PW-03) have not supported the case of

prosecution. She also submits that sample packets were

depositted two days after receiving it from the Malkhana and

delay in depositing the sample packets has not been properly

explained. She further submits that the appellants are in jail since

31.07.2018 and appeal is likely to take some more time. Hence, it

is prayed that their application may be allowed.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the

bail application.

Heard both the parties.

After perusing the impugned judgment, statements of the

witnesses and considering the fact that the appellants are in jail

since 31.07.2018 and further considering the age of the

appellants. I am of this opinion that it will be proper to release the appellants on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

Execution of substantive jail sentences imposed upon the

appellants shall remain suspended during the pendency of this

appeal and they shall be released on bail on each of them

executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two

local solvent sureties each of Rs.1,00,000/- to the satisfaction of

the concerned trial Court for their appearance before the Registry

of this Court on 07.12.2021. They shall thereafter appear before

the trial Court on a date to be given by the Registry of this Court

and shall continue to appear there on all such subsequent dates

as are given to them by the s.aid Court, till the disposal of this

appeal.

List this case for final hearing in due course.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

Vasant