Parminder Singh Gill vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 20624 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Parminder Singh Gill vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 December, 2023

Author: Hirdesh

Bench: Hirdesh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR CRA No. 12117 of 2023 (PARMINDER SINGH GILL AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Dated : 06-12-2023 Shri A.H.Usmani & Shri Sunil Pandey - Advocates for appellant.

Ms.Ekta Gupta - Panel Lawyer for the State.

Considered I.A.No.23715/2023, which is first application u/s 389(1) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence on behalf of appellant-Parminder Singh Gill.

Vide impugned judgment dated 23.8.2023 passed by the Special Judge

(NDPS Act), Chhattarpur in NDPS Sc No.01/2022 the appellant/applicant has been convicted for offence under sections 8 r/w 20 of NDPS Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.1,00,000/- [Rupees One Lac only] with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that trial Court erred in not appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record. The impugned judgment dated 23.8.2023 is undoubtedly not acceptable because there is no evidence in the case to enter into conviction and, in fact, the court below ought to have acquitted the appellant. The appellant has always cooperated with the

investigation and during trial. He has very good case on merit and there is every likelihood of this appeal being finally allowed. The appellant is custody since 01.9.2021 till 23.8.2023 and thereafter from the date of judgment till today. He was bail during trial. The Police has not complied with the provisions of sections 42 & 50A of the NDPS Act. The Investigating Officer has not done proper investigation. Learned counsel has placed reliance on paragraphs 30 & 31 of the judgment and evidence of PW.8, PW.6 & PW.5 and further submitted that independent witnesses have turned hostile and 'panch' witnesses are the

pocket witnesses of the prosecution. The trial Court has not allowed the application u/s 311 of Cr.P.C. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the decisions in the cases of Ritesh Chakarvarti Vs. State of M.P., (2006) 12 SCC 321, Mangilal Vs. State of M.P., 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 549, Mathura Prasad Vs. State of U.P., (2005) Cr.L.J., Vijay Narayan Singh Vs. State of Bihar, (2005) 2 JCR 369a and Buta Khan Vs. State of Punjab [CRA-S- 262-SB-2018 (O&M) decided on 26.8.2022].

Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Considered the facts and

circumstances of the case and perused the record. Taking into account the evidence of prosecution witnesses and quantity of 'ganja' seized by Police i.e. 2 qunitals, 50 Kg. & 400 gms., this Court does not find it to be a fit case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant/applicant. Hence, prayer stands rejected.

I.A.No.No.23715/2023 is dismissed.

(HIRDESH) JUDGE

RM