Dushrathsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6016 MP

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                             AT INDORE
                                BEFORE
               HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA

                     ON THE 23rd OF APRIL, 2022

               CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 889 of 2022

             (DUSHRATHSINGH VS. STATE OF M.P.)
                               ORDER

Shri Himanshu Thakur, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Kamal Kumar Tiwari, learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State.

****** Heard on I.A. No.1253/2022, which is application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence of sole appellant.

The appellant has been convicted under Section 8 R/w section 18(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act, and sentenced to undergo 4 years R.I. with fine of Rs.2,0000/- with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court to the Panchanama (Ex.P/17) prepared under Section 50 of N.D.P.S. Act. According to which PW-4 has given third option to the appellant to be searched by him after giving two option. In this Panchanama only signature of appellant was there without mentioning that he has to be searched by PW-4. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment passed in case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Parmanand & Anr. reported in 2014 CRI.L.J.1756 in which the Apex Court has held that option to be searched before Gazetted Officer or Magistrate, third option given to accused persons viz. to be searched before Superintendent who was part of raiding party would frustrate provision of Section 50(1) of N.D.P.S. Act, search conducted therefore, is vitiated.

Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the application, submitting that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the appellant on bail, hence the application filed by the appellant be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the application for suspension of custodial sentence moved on behalf of the appellant deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, I.A. No.1253/2022,, is allowed subject to deposit fine amount and on furnishing personal bond by the appellant in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for his appearance before the Court, the execution of custodial part of the sentence shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.

After enlarged on bail, the appellant shall mark his presence before the concerned court on 12.12.2022 and on all such subsequent dates, which are fixed in this regard by the Court concerned.

Let record of the trial Court be called for.

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE praveen/-

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN NAYAK Date: 2022.04.23 18:53:36 +05'30'