Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhupendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 December, 2022
Author: Amar Nath (Kesharwani)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 10219 of 2022
(BHUPENDRA SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 29-12-2022
Shri Santosh Kumar Meena - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Sanjay Karanjaywala - GA for State.
Heard on admission.
Admit.
Record of the court below be requisitioned.
Also heard on I.A. No.14538/2022, which is first application under
Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for suspension of remaining jail sentence on behalf of
the appellant.
The appellant has been convicted under Section 15(b) of NDPS Act
and sentenced to undergo five years R.I. with fine of Rs.50,000/- with default
stipulation by Special Judge, NDPS Act, Jaora, Distt. Ratlam.
As per prosecution story, on 19.8.2017 ASI Jagdish Chanra Kumawat of
Police station Kalukheda received secret information that two persons were
carrying contraband poppy straw on a black an red colour Honda Dream Yoga
motor cycle without number an they were gong towards Rajasthan via
Bhaisana. They were apprehended and search was conducted after complying
with the provision of section 50 of the NDPS Act from the joint possession of
the appellants 39 kg poppy straw was recovered and thereafter FIR was
registered and they were sent to the custody. Since then they are in jail. They are
tried by Special the Judge, and vide judgment dated 27.10.2022 the appellant
has been convicted under Section 8/15(b)of NDPS Act and sentenced each to
undergo 05 years R.I. with fine of Rs. 50,000/- with default stipulation.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 30-12-2022
12:10:37
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been
sentenced to undergo 05 years of jail sentence and only 39 kg poppy straw was
seized from the joint possession of the appellants which is not the commercial
quantity. He also submits that this appeal is not likely to come up for final
hearing in near future. In all probability, the entire sentence would have been
undergone by the time the appeal is heard. He also submits that the appellant
was on bail during the pendency of the trial and he has not misused the liberty
of bail. Therefore, the present appellant may be enlarged on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the application.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments
advanced by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the fact that only 39
kg poppy straw was seized from the joint possession of the appellants which is
not the commercial quantity and only five year of jail sentence has been
imposed as also conclusion of this appeal will take long time, this Court is of
the the considered opinion that the application for suspension of custodial
sentence moved on behalf of the appellant deserved to be allowed.
Accordingly, I.A. No.14538/2022 is allowed and it is directed that subject
t o depositing fine amount and on furnishing personal bond by the appellant
Bhupendra Singh in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with
one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court
for his appearance before the Registry of this Court, the execution of custodial
part of the sentence shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal.
The appellant after being enlarged on bail shall mark his presence before
Registry of this court on 13/03/2023 and on all such subsequent dates, which
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 30-12-2022
12:10:37
are fixed in this regard by the Registry.
All pending Interlocutory applications also stand disposed off.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
V. JUDGE
VM
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 30-12-2022
12:10:37
