Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajesh Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 October, 2023
Author: Roopesh Chandra Varshney
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 4568 of 2020
(RAJESH KUMAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 11-10-2023
Shri Manish Datt - Senior Advocate with Shri Siddharth Bendel -
Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Akhilendra Singh - Government Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard on admission.
Admit.
Also heard on I.A.No.11344 of 2020 which is the first application under
Section 389 (1) CrPC for suspension of custodial sentence filed on behalf of
sole appellant-Rajesh Kumar.
Appellant stood convicted under Section 8(C) read with Section 20 (B)
(ii)(C) of NDPS Act and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 10 years with fine of
Rs.1,00,000/- and default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 28.07.2020 passed by Special Judge (NDPS) Act, Dindori
District Dindori in SC NDPS/05/2018.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that provision of Section 42
and 52 of the NDPS Act have not been complied with. Tehsildar has not been
examined. Separate samples have not been taken from each packet instead they
have been accumulated for weighing. Thus, conviction of the appellant is bad in
law. Learned counsel for the appellant in support of his contention has relied
upon judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mangilal vs. State of
M.P. (2023) Live Law (SC) 549, Simarnjit Singh vs. State of Punjab (2023)
Live Law (SC) 570 and Saudan Singh vs. State of UP [Criminal Appeal No.
308/2022 (@SLP (Crl.) No. 4633/2021]. Apart that, it is contended that the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SARSWATI
MEHRA
Signing time: 10/12/2023
10:11:34 AM
appellant has served out more than half the sentence awarded to him.
It is further submitted by the counsel for the appellant that during trial the
appellant was on bail and he has not misused the liberty granted to him. It is
further submitted that appeal is of the year 2020 and there is no likelihood of
appeal being taken up for final hearing. On these grounds, prayer is made to
suspend the sentence of the appellant and grant him bail.
Per contra learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that huge
quantity of contraband (Ganja) has been seized from the appellant, therefore, he
is not entitled for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Considering overall facts and circumstances of the case; period of
incarceration of the appellant as also the fact that appeal is of the year 2020 and
there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in near future, however,
without touching merits of the matter, appellant is held entitled for suspension
of jail sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.11344 of 2020 stands allowed and it is directed that
the jail sentence of appellant- Rajesh Kumar shall remained suspended and he
be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond 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 trial Court subject to verification of factum
regarding deposit of fine amount. Appellant is directed to appear before the trial
Court first on 20.12.2023 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in
this behalf.
List for final hearing in due course.
(ROOPESH CHANDRA VARSHNEY)
JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SARSWATI
MEHRA
Signing time: 10/12/2023
10:11:34 AM
sm
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SARSWATI
MEHRA
Signing time: 10/12/2023
10:11:34 AM
