Shyamlal Kurmi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 16233 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shyamlal Kurmi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 May, 2024

Author: Anuradha Shukla

Bench: Anuradha Shukla

                                                              1
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                      CRA No. 3477 of 2024
                                            (SHYAMLAL KURMI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

                          Dated : 30-05-2024
                                Shri Prakash Upadhyay - Advocate for appellant.

                                Shri Prasanjeet Chaterjee - Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

Heard on I.A Nos.6682/2023, which is first application under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of appellant.

The appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 20(B)(ii)(B) r/w 8-C and 29 of NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs.20,000/-, with default stipulations.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the matter. He also submits that the trial Court has not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on record and committed an error in convicting the appellant for aforesaid offence. Appellant is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by the directions and conditions, which may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that

the application for suspension of sentence of the appellant may be considered.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the applications and prayed for its rejection.

Having heard the arguments and on perusal of the record, this Court is of the considered opinion that till disposal of this appeal, execution of jail sentence awarded to the appellant under the impugned judgment deserves to be suspended. Therefore, without commenting on the merit of the case, this application is allowed.

I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited, and on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, the custodial sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended and he shall be released on bail for securing his presence before the trial Court concerned on 02.09.2024 and on such other dates as may be fixed in this regard during pendency of this appeal.

Accordingly, the aforesaid I.A. stands allowed and disposed of. List this case for final hearing in due course.

(ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE

pnm