Dinesh Kuchbandiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3817 MP

                                    1                              CRA-3379-2015
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                   CRA-3379-2015
                 (DINESH KUCHBANDIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

55
Jabalpur, Dated : 31-07-2021
       Heard through Video Conferencing.
       Shri B.K. Upadhyay, Advocate for the appellant.
       Shri Yogesh Mishra, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard on I.A.No.10767/2021, filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C on behalf of the appellant Dinesh Kuchbandiya for suspension of substantive

jail sentence.

Appellant has been convicted by the judgment dated 04.12.2015 passed by Special Judge (NDPS) Act Hoshagabad (M.P.) in Special Case No.06/2015. The trial Court convicted the appellant Dinesh Kuchbandiya for the offence under Section 8 R/w Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act and awarded sentence of 10 years R.I with fine of Rs.1,00,000/- with default stipulation.

This is the six application for suspension of sentence. Earlier vide order dated 27.06.2017 prayer for suspension of sentence was dismissed on

merits. Vide orders dated 07.10.2016, 05.07.2018, 12.07.2019 and 10.12.2020 applications have been dismissed.

It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent. He is in custody since March, 2015 and has completed 6 years and 6 months of sentence. Disposal of this appeal will take time. If the appellant's sentence is not suspended his appeal will be futile. It is further submitted that the appellant has a fair chance to succeed in the appeal. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it is prayed that the execution of jail sentence be suspended.

Learned Panel Lawyer opposed the aforesaid application and submitted that two time the application for suspension of sentence has been rejected on merits, unless there is substantial change in the circumstance, the 2 CRA-3379-2015 application for the same relief cannot be considered.

In the present case, the application has been filed merely on the ground of completion of more than half of custody period, which is not a ground for grant of bail. Once an application for suspension of sentence has been rejected on merit, then mere period of custody is not relevant to take a different view.

Having considered the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, this application (I.A.No.10767/2021) is rejected.

List this appeal for final hearing as per its turn.

(ARUN KUMAR SHARMA) JUDGE

Vin**

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by VINOD SHARMA Date: 2021.07.31 15:29:45 IST