Jharkhand High Court
Laxman Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.791 of 2022
1. Laxman Yadav
2. Jyoti Kumar Ram ..... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
For the Appellants : Mr. Prabhat Kr. Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, APP
-----
5/03.01.2023 Heard learned defence counsel Mr. Prabhat Kr. Sinha appearing on
behalf of the appellants and Mrs. Ruby Pandey, learned APP appearing on
behalf of the State.
2. Learned defence counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants
submitted that one I.A. No. 9928 of 2022 has been filed for the suspension of
execution of order of sentence by releasing both the appellants on bail
during the pending of this appeal.
3. It has been pointed out that this Court has already admitted this
appeal, which has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 30.08.2022 and 31.08.2022 respectively passed by
learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS cases, Chatra, in NDPS
Case No.23 of 2015, arising out of Bashistanagar P.S. Case No.28 of 2015
(G.R. No.555 of 2015), under which both the appellants were convicted for
the offence punishable under section 15 (b) of NDPS act and they were
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 4 years and the learned court below also
imposed a fine of ₹10,000/- each and further in default of payment of fine,
both the appellants were directed to further undergo S.I. for one year
consecutively.
4. It has been pointed out by learned defence counsel that search and
seizure has not been conducted as per the prescribed procedure under
section 50 of NDPS Act in presence of any gazetted officer and further the
seized articles were not sent for chemical examination immediately after the
alleged seizure from the conscious possession of the appellants and after a
delay of about one month, it has been sent to the Forensic Science
Laboratory for its chemical examination. Further the seizure list witnesses
namely PW-6 and PW-7 have stated in their depositions that they were
sitting in the police station and they did not have any knowledge as to what
was written in the seizure list. Further it has also been pointed out that the
alleged poppy straw is said to be have been recovered from the conscious
possession of the appellants, when it was seized from the pickup van and
the raiding party were not having the testing kit at the spot and the alleged
contraband seized was not weighed. Further it has also been pointed out
that both the appellants were all along on bail and after conviction they are
in jail since 30.08.2022 and both the appellants have remained in jail for
about 9 months including pre-conviction period and post-conviction period
and therefore both the appellants deserve to be enlarged on bail during
pending of this appeal.
5. On the other hand, learned APP appearing on behalf of the state
opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the defence counsel appearing
on behalf of the appellants.
6. Having taken into consideration the persuasive submissions
advanced on behalf of the appellants by learned defence counsel under the
facts and circumstances of this case, these appellants namely Laxman Yadav
and Jyoti Kumar Ram are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned Sessions
Judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS cases, Chatra, in NDPS Case No.23 of 2015,
in connection with Bashistanagar P.S. Case No.28 of 2015 (G.R. No.555 of
2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.,
and further subject to the payment of fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
thousand only) by each of the appellants as directed by learned court below
and both the appellants are directed to submit the money receipt to that
effect before this court.
7. Accordingly, the I.A. No. 9928 of 2022 gets disposed of.
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.791 of 2022
8. Call for the original lower court record. Let this case be listed under
the heading for hearing in seriatim after the receipt of the original Lower
Court Records.
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
R.Kumar
