Shah Alom vs The State Of Assam
2022 Latest Caselaw 4444 Gua

                                                                   Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010227342022




                          THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                             Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/701/2022



           SHAH ALOM
           S/O TAYAB ALI
           VILL.- TOKRABANDHA
           P.O.- CHAPAR
           P.S.- CHAPAR
           DIST.- DHUBRI
           ASSAM
           PIN- 783371.


           VERSUS

           THE STATE OF ASSAM
           REP. BY P.P.
           ASSAM.


           ------------
           Advocate for : MR. M U MAHMUD
           Advocate for : PP
           ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM



                                 BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
                                 ORDER

14.11.2022

Heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. S.H. Bora, learned Addl. P.P. for the opposite party.

Page No.# 2/2

This interlocutory application is filed under section 389[1] of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence passed vide judgment and order dated 21.10.2022 and order dated 21.10.2022 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bilasipara in sessions case no. 85/2019.

It is to be noted here that vide judgment and order the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bilasipara has convicted the applicant under sections 27[b][ii] of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 and ½ years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- with default stipulation.

The connected appeal has already been admitted and the LCR has already been called for.

Mr. Mahmud submits that the sections under which the applicant has been convicted, is not attracted here in this case and this is not a case at all for conviction, and therefore, it is contended to allow the applicant to go on bail.

Having heard the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and considering the facts and circumstances on the record and also considering the nature and gravity of offence and further considering the fact there is no immediate prospect by hearing the appeal this Court is inclined to allow the applicant to go on bail. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bilasipara, the applicant be enlarge on bail.

In terms of above, this IA stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant