Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manish Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 May, 2023
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 3795 of 2022
(MANISH THAKUR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 10-05-2023
Shri Jitendra Bajpai - Advocate for appellant.
Mr. Surendra Gupta, counsel for the respondent/State.
Heard on IA No.6253/2023 which is second application under Section
389 (1) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for suspension of jail sentence of
appellant Manish Thakur who has been convicted by the Court of learned
Special Judge, NDPS Act, 1985, Indore (MP) in Special NDPS Case
No.700012/2013 vide judgment dated 25.03.2022 and has been sentenced to
undergo RI for seven years with fine of Rs.30,000/- with default stipulation.
2. Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has already
undergone jail sentence of two years and three months out of seven years of
imprisonment. The quantity which is alleged to be seized from the joint
possession of accused persons is 19 kilograms of Ganja which is less than the
commercial quantity. It is further submitted that the trial Court in para-22 has
held that provisions of Section 42 of NDPS Act were not complied with and the
intimation to the senior officer as envisaged under sub-section 2 of Section 42
of the Act has not been proved. Ex.P/31 was not proved by the prosecution,
however, the trial Court has held that the provision of Section 42 would not
apply in the facts of the present case and the case would be covered under
Section 43 of NDPS Act. He further submits that the trial Court has taken a
wrong view in the present case as the seizure of the contraband was made from
private vehicle and not from the public transport in public place. He further
submits that conveyance is included under Section 42(1) of the Act. In support
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 11-05-2023
14:47:11
of his submission, he has placed reliance on a judgment passed by the Apex
Court dated 16.04.2021 (Bhuta Singh vs. State of Haryana in CRA
No.421/2021) whereby the accused was acquitted for noncompliance of
Section 42 of the Act.
3. Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into
consideration the fact the trial Court has held in para-22 that the prosecution has
not complied with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the Act and the provisions
of Section 43 would be applicable which is contrary to the view taken by the
Apex Court in the case of Bhuta Singh (supra), the alleged quantity of
contraband is less than the commercial quantity and the appellant has already
undergone the jail sentence of two years and three months and the final hearing
of appeal is likely to take time, it would be appropriate to suspend the jail
sentence of the appellant. Accordingly, application IA No.6253/2023 is allowed.
5. It is directed that substantive jail sentence of appellant Manish
Thakur shall be suspended subject to his depositing the fine amount (if not
already deposited) and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh) with one local solvent surety of like amount to
the satisfaction of trial Court for his appearance before the Registry of this
Court on 28.08.2023 and on all other subsequent dates as may be fixed by the
Registry in this behalf.
Accordingly, application IA No.6253/2023 stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 11-05-2023
14:47:11
VM
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 11-05-2023
14:47:11
