Dinesh Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand
2024 Latest Caselaw 9818 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Dinesh Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 October, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                      Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 365 of 2024
          Dinesh Yadav, aged about 40 years, son of late Gauri Yadav, resident of
          village Rajguruwa, P.O. Jori, Police Station Bashistanager, District-Chatra
                                                                  ..... Appellant
                            Versus
      The State of Jharkhand                                      ...... Respondent
                                             ----
      CORAM:          HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

---

For the Appellant(s) :- Mr. A. K. Chaturvedy, Advocate

For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, A.P.P.

----

I.A. No. 6127 of 2024 03/03.10.2024 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

2. This appeal is already admitted and L.C.R. is on record.

3. I.A. No. 6127 of 2024 has been filed for suspension of sentence and release the appellant on bail, during the pendency of this appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been convicted by order dated 07.06.2024 and sentenced by order dated 10.06.2024 by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chatra in NDPS Case No. 126 of 2018. He further submits that the appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for four years along with fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence under section 15(b) of ND.P.S Act.

5. By way of referring impugned judgement, learned counsel for the appellant submits that allegation is made of recovery of two and half K.G. poppy straw which is small quantity. He submits that as per Act, commercial quantity is 50 kg. He further submits that the maximum sentence is four years and the appellant has remained in custody for about 10 months. He submits that it has come in the impugned judgment that there is no history of conviction against the appellant prior to judgment of conviction of the present case.

6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the appellant has not completed half of the sentence.

7. Considering that the appellant has remained in custody for about ten months and there is recovery of two and half K.G. poppy straw which is small quantity and as per the Act commercial quantity is 50 kg, I am inclined to grant bail to the appellant. Accordingly, the above

named appellant is directed to be released on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chatra in NDPS Case No. 126 of 2018.

8. The aforesaid interlocutory application is allowed and disposed of.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J) Satyarthi