Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shivam Mishra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 February, 2024
Author: Sunita Yadav
Bench: Sunita Yadav
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 930 of 2024
(SHIVAM MISHRA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 29-02-2024
Mr. Anand Purohit, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Rohit Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for the respondent - State.
The appeal being arguable is admitted for final hearing.
Heard on I.A. No.2299 of 2024, first application under Section 389 of
the Cr.P.C for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
Present criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C.
assailing the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 19.12.2023 passed by
Special Sessions Judge, NDPS Act, District Gwalior (M.P.) in SC NDPS
No.24/2019, whereby appellant has been convicted and sentenced under
Section 8(ga) r/w 21(kha) of NDPS Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment of
eight years with fine of Rs.5000/-, with default stipulations.
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that learned trial Court has
wrongly convicted the appellant ignoring the fact that mandatory provisions
have also not been complied with while seizing the contraband as per statement
of PW/2 and Ex P/4 and P/5 it is apparent that third option of search has been
given which was not contemplated in Sub Section 1 of Section 50 of the NDPS
Act in light of judgment in the case of Dayalu Kashyap Vs. State of
Chhattisgarh, (2022) 12 SCC 398 and Ranjan Kumar Chaddha Vs. State
of Himachal Pradesh, (2023) SCC Online SC 1262, therefore, entire
prosecution story becomes doubtful. Independent witnesses of recovery have
also not supported the case of the prosecution and turned hostile. It is further
argued that appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty so
granted. He has already served incarceration around five months out of total
sentence of 8 years. Present appeal is likely to take long time to come up for
final hearing. Under these circumstances, he prays for suspension of jail
sentence of the appellant and grant of bail to him.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the application and
prayed for its rejection.
Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the record.
Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties,
without commenting upon the merits of the case, application (I.A. No. 2299 of
2024) is allowed and it is directed that subject to depositing of fine amount, if
not already deposited, and on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rupees Two Lakh only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, remaining jail sentence of the appellant
shall remain suspended and he be released on bail. He is further directed to
mark his presence before the Registry of this Court on 28.05.2024 and on
subsequent dates as may be given in this regard.
List the case in due course.
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for necessary
compliance.
E-copy/certified copy as per rules/directions.
(SUNITA YADAV)
JUDGE
(LJ*)
