Barkat Ali vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 9540 MP

                                                                                 1
                                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                       AT INDORE
                                                                         CRA No. 9788 of 2019
                                                           (BARKAT ALI AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                                            Dated : 13-07-2022
                                                  Shri Vinod Thakur, learned counsel for the appellant no.1.

                                                  Mr. Abhishek Rathore, learned counsel for the appellant no.2.
                                                  Shri Rajesh Joshi G.A. appearing on behalf of Advocate General/State.
                                                  Heard on the question of admission.
                                                  The appeal is admitted for final hearing.
                                                  Heard on I.A. Nos.5894/2022 & 4214/2022, first application under

                                            Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on
                                            behalf of the appellant no.1 Barkat Ali and second application on behalf of
                                            appellant no.2 Sokat respectively.
                                                  First application of appellant no.2 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order
                                            dated 20.09.2021.
                                                  The appellants have been convicted for offence under Section 8/15(C) of
                                            the N.D.P.S.Act and sentenced to undergo 10 years R.I. with fine of
                                            Rs.1,00,000/- each with default stipulations.
                                                  Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants are in

                                            jail since 01.09.2013 and have undergone almost 8 years and 10 months of their
                                            jail sentence. It is further submitted that final hearing of this appeal is likely to
                                            take a sufficient long time in near future. It is further submitted that if the appeal
                                            is not heard it would render infructuous because the appellants would complete
                                            the entire jail sentence. Under these           circumstances, counsel prays for
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
  SAN                 AMIT KUMAR
                      Date: 2022.07.15
                                            suspension of remaining jail sentence of appellants and grant of bail.
                      18:56:22 IST


                                                  Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State o n the other hand, has

opposed t h e bail application and prays for its rejection by supported the judgment of conviction passed by learned trial Court, therefore, there is no ground for acquittal of the appellant.

Recently, the Apex Court in the case of Mossa Koya KP V/s. State (NCT of Delhi) [Cr. Appeal No.1562/2021 decided on 6.12.2021] has suspended the jail sentence after undergoing the 8 years out of the total 10 years jail sentence. Relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are reproduced below :

"12. We appreciate the submission of the Additional Solicitor General that offences under the NDPS Act are of a serious nature and the case is at the post conviction stage. Yet the Court cannot be

unmindful of the fact that the appellant has undergone 8 years out of the total sentence of 10 years. The appeal is unlikely to be heard early. In all probability, the entire sentence would have been undergone by the time the appeal is heard. The decisions on the basis of which the High Court of Delhi has declined to grant suspension of sentence, are, at the highest, a broad guideline and cannot be placed on the same pedestal as a statutory interdict. With the pendency of the work in the High Court, it may not be feasible to expedite the disposal of the appeal within a short period.

13. In the circumstances, particularly, since the appellant has undergone 8 years out of ten years of the total sentence which has been imposed on him, we are of the view that a fit and proper case has been made out for the suspension of the sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C."

Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.07.15 18:56:22 IST Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the period of

incarceration of the appellants, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applications for suspension of jail sentence filed on behalf of the appellants deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, I.A. Nos.5894/2022 & 4214/2022 are allowed and it is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount and on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) with two solvent sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, the execution of jail sentence imposed against the appellants shall remain suspended, till the final disposal of this appeal for their appearance before the Registry of this Court on 12.09.2022 and on all such subsequent dates, as may be fixed by the Registry in this regard.

List for final hearing in due course.

Certified copy, as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE

amit

Signature Not Verified VerifiedDigitally Digitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.07.15 18:56:22 IST