Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Anwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 14059 MP

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 14059 MP
Judgement Date : 14 May, 2024

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Anwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 May, 2024

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

                                                            1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT INDORE
                                                    BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                 ON THE 14 th OF MAY, 2024
                                            CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1272 of 2015

                          BETWEEN:-
                          ANWAR S/O MOHAMMED HUSAIN, AGED ABOUT 35
                          Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: LABORER  VILLAGE
                          MULTANPURA PS YD NAGAR DIST. MANDSAUR
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPELLANT
                          (BY MS.MAYURI JAIN - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                          OFFICER THROUGH PS JAWAD DISTT. NEEMUCH
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY SHRI SUDHANSHU VYAS - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

                                T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                          following:
                                                           JUDGMENT

A PUD has been received from Special Judge, NDPS Act, Neemuch that appellant was granted temporary suspension of jail sentence by order dated 31.10.2019 for a period of one month from the date of release subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.4 Lacs with two sureties of Rs.1 lac each to the satisfaction of the trial court, with a direction to surrender immediately after expiry of the aforesaid period. After expiry of period of one month from the date of release since 2019, the appellant has not surrendered.

2. Counsel for appellant submits that she has no instructions from the

client.

3. The appeal is under section 374 Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 17.8.2015 passed by ASJ, Neemuch in Special S.T.No. 13/2012 whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 8/15(C) and 8/18 (C) of NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo 10 and 4 years RI with fine of Rs.1 Lac and Rs.50,000/- with default stipulation.

4. As per prosecution story, on 11.10.2011 on receiving secret information that two persons on pickup vehicle are carrying illegal Poppystraw and opium towards Nagda Keli road to Rajasthan. On searching the vehicle, police found 20 bags having 04 quintal 22 Kg. Poppystraw and 2 Kg. Opium.

They were arrested and police registered the offence under section 8/15(c) an 8/18 (c) of NDPS Act against the accused persons. After trial, they were convicted and sentenced as above.

5. On going through the record, it transpires that 20 bags containing 04 quintal 22 Kg. Poppystraw and 2 Kg. Opium were seized from the pickup vehicle. The prosecution has successfully proved its case by the testimony of complainant- Narendra Singh Sengar (PW-4) who was posted as Sub-Inspector at police station, Nayagaon. His testimony is further supported by Kailash Kumre (PW-7) who was working as Constable in the said police station. Though the independent witness Jagdish (PW-2) and Majid Khan (PW-3) who were panch witnesses have not supported the prosecution case, however, they have admitted their signature on Ex.P/3 to P/24. From the testimony of Narendra Singh Sengar (PW-4) and Kailash Kumre (PW-7), it is found that provisions of section 40, 52, 52A, 55 and 57 of the NDPS Act are complied with.

6. Counsel for the appellant could not point out any violation of the

aforesaid provisions. A huge quantity of contraband has been seized. In view of aforesaid, this Court does not find any error in the judgment of conviction and sentence. In view of aforesaid, the appeal stands dismissed.

7. The appellant has not surrendered after expiry of period of temporary suspension of sentence granted vide order dated 31.10.2019 for a month. Counsel for the appellant has also pleaded no instructions. In view of this, trial court is directed to issue permanent warrant of arrest against the appellant and to take action against the surety.

With the aforesaid, the appeal stands disposed off.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE MK

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter