Madhya Pradesh High Court
Satyendra Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 December, 2021
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
1 CRA-3379-2016
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA No. 3379 of 2016
(SATYENDRA SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Jabalpur, Dated : 06-12-2021
Shri Kuldeep Singh Rajpoot, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Roopesh Patel, learned P.L. for the respondent/State.
Heard on IA No.4128/2021, which is an application for suspension
of custodial sentence passed against appellant Satyendra Sharma.
T h i s appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated
18/10/2016 passed by Special Judge (NDPS Act), Narsinghpur in
Special Case no.4/2013, whereby learned Special Judge found the
appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 8/20 (b)(ii)(B)
of the NDPS Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for two years with
fine of Rs.2000/- with default clause.
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that it is alleged that
on 28/02/2013 Police seized 4.100 kg. ganja from the possession of
appellant, but in this regard statement of P.L. Pal Investigation Officer
(PW/7) do not corroborate by the statement of independent witnesses of
seizure memo i.e. Siyram (PW/1) and Hari Singh (PW/2). There are
many contradiction and omission in the statement of P.L. Pal (PW/7)
regarding seizure of ganja from the possession of appellant. Even it is
also not proved that the ganja which was seized by the Police from the
possession of appellant was sent to chemical examination. Learned trial
Court without appreciating prosecution evidence properly, wrongly
found the appellant guilty for the aforesaid offence. The appellant is in
custody since 09/03/2021 and according to listing policy the hearing of
this appeal will take time. Hence prayed for suspension of the jail
sentence and release of the appellant on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted
that the guilt of the appellant was proved beyond reasonable doubt,
therefore, learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the
appellant.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the contention
of learned counsel for the appellant and the fact that the the appellant is
in custody since 09/03/2021, the application is allowed and it is directed
that the execution of the jail sentence alone passed against the appellant
shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he be
released on bail upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI
Date: 2021.12.06 18:46:19 IST
2 CRA-3379-2016
(Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of
this Court on 21/03/2022 and on such further dates as may be fixed in this
behalf by the Registry during the pendency of this appeal.
The appeal is already admitted, so list for final hearing in due
course.
C.C. on payment of usual charges.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY)
JUDGE
as
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI
Date: 2021.12.06 18:46:19 IST
