Jharkhand High Court
Sonu Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 October, 2024
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Navneet Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 907 of 2024
--------
Sonu Kumar Singh, aged about 31 years, S/o Harendra Singh, R/o
Village-Raidih Basti Near Santoshi Mandir Road No.10, P.O. & P.S. -
R.I.T. Adityapur, District-Saraikela-Kharsawan .. ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR
--------
For the Appellant : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Singh , Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl. PP
--------
th
Order No. 06/ Dated: 14 October, 2024
IA No.9837 of 2024
The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed on behalf of
appellant under Section 430(1) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023 for suspension of sentence/grant of bail during the pendency of the
instant Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 907 of 2024 in connection with N.D.P.S. Case
No.05 of 2019 against the judgment of conviction dated 30.03.2024 and
order of sentence dated 06.04.2024 passed by learned Special Judge,
Dhanbad, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under
Section 20(b)ii(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 15
years along with fine of Rs.1,50,000/- and in default of payment of fine
further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for 01 year.
2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that it is a case
where the appellant has falsely been implicated. It has further been
submitted that the procedure has not been followed which ought to have
been followed at the time of seizure of the contraband (Ganja). Further,
submission has been made that there is wide contradiction in the deposition
of the witnesses but without taking into consideration the aforesaid fact the
judgment of conviction has been passed, therefore, it is a case where the
appellant is being able to substantiate the prima facie case and as such, it is
a fit case where the order of sentence is to be suspended.
3. While on the other hand, learned Special Public Prosecutor
appearing for the respondent-State has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail and has submitted that it is incorrect on the part of the appellant to take
the ground that there is no procedure has been followed at the time of the
seizure of the contraband. According to him, all the procedures have been
followed which has been taken note by the learned trial Court. Submission
has also been made that the 40 packets which contain the 84.5 kgs of the
Ganja has been found in the vehicle while intercepted by the PW-7 who has
got the confidential information which has been put before the Judicial
Magistrate, Dhanbad and the samples were taken from all 40 Packets and
kept in small containers to be sent to the S.F.S.L., Ranchi for chemical
examination. The report of the doctor substantiated the content thereof was
of Ganja. The learned Special P.P. based upon the aforesaid material
available before the learned trial Court, which is the basis of the judgment
of conviction, has submitted that it is not a case where it can be said that the
appellant has been able to make out a prima facie for suspension of
sentence.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, gone through the
finding recorded by the learned trial Court in the impugned judgment. We
have also gone through the testimonies of all the witnesses as available in
the Lower Court Record.
5. We on consideration of the testimonies of the witnesses and the
materials available in the Lower Court Record have found that the PW-7
has supported the prosecution version of the trial who has deposed that on
getting the confidential information, the vehicle was intercepted and 40
packets have been recovered containing therein the Ganja which has
subsequently been found 84.5 kg when it was produced before the Judicial
Magistrate, Dhanbad.
6. We have also found that the samples were taken from all 40 packets
and had been kept in small containers for the purpose of sending it to the
S.F.S.L., Ranchi for chemical examination. The report has come under the
signature of the Director of the S.F.S.L. Ranchi, marked as Exhibit-6,
authenticating therein that Ganja has been found to be in the contents of the
samples.
7. The learned trial Court based upon the material has come to the
conclusion that the ingredient under Section 20(b)ii(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act
is attracted and as such considering the quantity which is of commercial,
2 Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 907 of 2024
the judgment of conviction and order of sentence has been passed.
8. This Court in view thereof is of the view that the appellant has not
been able to make out a prima facie case for grant of bail and accordingly,
I.A. No. 9837 of 2024 filed for suspension of sentence/grant of bail by the
appellant is hereby rejected and consequently disposed of.
9. It is made clear that any observation made hereinabove will not
prejudice the case on merit, since, the criminal appeal is pending before this
Court for its consideration.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Navneet Kumar, J.)
Basant/S.Das
3 Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 907 of 2024
