Madhya Pradesh High Court
Firoz Khan vs Police Staion Hoshangabad The ... on 1 April, 2022
Author: Virender Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 210 of 2014
(FIROZ KHAN AND OTHERS Vs POLICE STAION HOSHANGABAD THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 01-04-2022
Shri Himanshu Thakur, counsel for the appellant.
Shri Ajay Shukla, Public Prosecutor for the State.
At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant prays for withdrawal of
I.A.No.2495/2022 and I.A.No.3981/2022. Accordingly, the same are dismissed as
withdrawn.
Heard on I.A.No.3985/2022 which is an application on behalf of appellant
No.3-Wajid Khan for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. He has been
convicted under Section 8 r/w 21(c) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo
RI for 14 years and fine Rs.100000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo
RI for 3 years.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that he is 63 years
of old and not keeping well in the jail. He is not able to perform his daily routine
without assistance. He has completed 10 years and 9 months in jail. Nothing had
been recovered from his possession. Being head of the family, he has been
implicated in this case, therefore, his sentence be suspended.
In reply, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that this is the fourth
application of the petitioner. All the grounds raised in this application have already
been considered by this Court. Nothing new has been put forth by the applicant
and ground of health has not been taken in the application. There is nothing on
record to substantiate the claim of the applicant regarding his health.
On merits it is submitted that a huge quantity (7.40 Kg.) of sophisticated
narcotic substance (Brown Sugar) worth crores of rupees has been recovered
from the possession of the sons of the applicant and on the basis of their
disclosure, a substantial quantity has also been recovered from the house which
was in possession of the applicant. The seizure has been proved by the
responsible police officers. Learned trial Court has considered each and every
Signature Not Verified
SAN
aspect of the crime in the impugned judgment. In paragraph 28 of the impugned
judgment, the seizure has been considered and found proved. Nothing contrary has
Digitally signed by ANAND KRISHNA SEN
Date: 2022.04.05 18:28:30 IST
been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. On all earlier occasions, the
applications of the applicant have been withdrawn after arguments,, therefore, it
cannot be said that the merits have not been considered earlier. Since there is no
substantial change in the facts and circumstances of the case, subsequent
application of the applicant cannot be allowed.
Considered the rival submission of the learned counsel for both the parties.
In this case, on a secret information, the police first arrested Firoj Khan and
recovered 1 Kg. Brown Sugar kept in 2 polythene pouches between his thighs.
Firoz revealed that some more quantity is kept with his father Wajid Khan
(applicant) and brother Aman Khan. Acting on this information, the police reached
to his house where Wajid Khan and Aman Khan were present. The police
recovered 2.5 Kg and 1.450 Kg Brown Sugar from their respective rooms whose
keys were provided by them. Further Aman disclosed that some more quantity
kept under a tree standing in the vacant land of Radha Swami Satsang from where
the police recovered 2.5 Kg of Brown Sugar. Thus, the police recovered total
7.450 Kgs. Brown Sugar from the possession of father and sons.
After going through the evidence produced by the prosecution before the
trial Court and its appreciation and also looking to the nature and gravity of
offence, evidence showing involvement of the applicant in the crime, we do not
find any merits to change the view taken earlier, therefore, the application-
I.A.No.3985/2022 is dismissed.
(VIRENDER SINGH) (SANJAY DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
anand
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ANAND KRISHNA SEN
Date: 2022.04.05 18:28:30 IST
