Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shailendra Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 January, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 10418 of 2022
(SHAILENDRA SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 17-01-2023
Shri Rituraj Bhatnagar - Advocate for appellant.
Ms. Bharti Lakkad - Government Advocate for respondent/State.
Heard on admission.
Admit.
Also heard on I.A. No.201/2023, 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 appellant and co-accused 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.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR
DATT JOSHI
Signing time: 18-01-2023
12:27:57
sentenced to undergo 05 years of jail sentence and only 39 kg poppy straw was
seized from the joint possession of the appellant and co-accused 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.
I 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. 201/2023 is allowed and it is directed that subject
t o depositing fine amount and on furnishing personal bond by the appellant
Shailendra 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
are fixed in this regard by the Registry.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR
DATT JOSHI
Signing time: 18-01-2023
12:27:57
All pending Interlocutory applications also stand disposed off.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
JUDGE
BDJ
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR
DATT JOSHI
Signing time: 18-01-2023
12:27:57
