Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sureshsingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 April, 2023
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 3006 of 2022
(SURESHSINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 18-04-2023
Shri S.K. Meena, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Viraj Godha, learned GA for the State.
Heard on I.A No.12936 of 2022 which is second application under
Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of jail sentence of appellant
Sureshsingh.
2 ) The present appellant has been convicted under Section 8/18(B) of
NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo 10 years RI with fine of Rs.1,00,000/-
with default stipulation.
3) As per prosecution case, 3 Kg. opium is alleged to have been seized
from the possession of the appellant.
4 ) Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has already
undergone jail sentence of 6 years 6 months and thus, he has undergone more
than 50% of the actual jail sentence awarded to him. The final hearing of the
appeal is likely to take time.
5) Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail mainly on
the ground that the alleged seized quantity is commercial quantity.
6 ) Counsel for the appellant in support of his submissions, has placed
reliance on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sanjay vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.104 of 2015 dated 17.01.2022)
wherein after relying on the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Thana Singh vs. Central Bureau of Narcotics passed in Civil Appeal
Date: 2023.04.19
11:19:30 IST
No.1640/2010 dated 30.08.2010 held that if the period of custody undergone by
the accused is more than 50% of the sentence i.e. awarded, then the application
for suspension of sentence may be considered on the said ground. He has also
placed reliance on the recent judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of
Mohammad Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) [Criminal Appeal No.
943/2023, dtd. 28.03.2023], wherein, the Apex Court has taken into
consideration the earlier judgments passed by the Apex Court in the case of
State of M.P. vs. Kajad (2001) 7 SCC 673 and also the judgment passed in the
case of Union of India vs. Ratan Malik (2009) 2 SCC 624 and thereafter
enlarged the accused on bail on completion of 50% of the actual jail sentence.
7 ) After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the aforesaid judgments passed by the Apex Court, it would be
appropriate to suspend the jail sentence of the appellant.
8 ) Accordingly, I.A No.12936 of 2022 filed on behalf of appellant is
allowed. The appellant be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) with one solvent surety of the
same amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his appearance before the
Registry of this Court on 28.08.2023 and thereafter, on such other subsequent
dates as may be fixed in that behalf.
9) As a consequence, application for urgent hearing (IA No.15569/2022)
stand disposed off.
CC as per rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
SAN
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by soumya
SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Date: 2023.04.19
11:19:30 IST
