Madhya Pradesh High Court
Amir vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 February, 2025
1 CRA-11381-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
CRA No. 11381 of 2024
(AMIR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 18-02-2025
Appellant by Shri Santosh Khoware - Advocate.
Respondent - State of Madhya Pradesh by Shri Virendra Khadav -
Government Advocate appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
Heard on I.A.No.1996 of 2025 , first application under Section 430 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (equivalent to Section 389 (1) of
Cr.P.C.) for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf
of appellant Aamir S/o Ifatekhar Khan.
Vide judgment and order dated 24.08.2024 passed in Special (NDPS)
Case No.28 of 2017 by learned Special Judge (under NDPS Act), Indore, the
appellant stands convicted under Section 8/22(b) of NDPS Act, 1985 and
sentenced to undergo 3 years RI with fine of Rs.10,000/- with usual default
stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant while taking exception to this
impugned judgment submits that appellant is innocent and he has been
falsely implicated in this matter. Learned counsel submits that it is a case of
short sentence wherein three years RI has been imposed on the appellant. He
was behind the bars for 99 days during trial and after passing of the judgment
i.e. 24.08.2024 he is suffering incarceration. There are no criminal
antecedents against the appellant. Learned counsel further submits that
appellant Gaurav S/o Mahesh in Criminal Appeal No.9914 of 2024 has been
2 CRA-11381-2024
given benefit of suspension of sentence vide order dated 04.02.2025. There
are material contradictions and omissions in the statement of the witnesses.
Impugned judgment suffer from surmises and conjectures and has been
passed ignoring serious infirmities and anomalies. He has fair chance of
success. Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in its right perspective.
It is further submitted that the appeal being of the year 2024 is not likely to
be heard finally in near future. There is a strong case in favour of the
appellant. Hence, under such circumstances prayer is made for suspension of
jail sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent/State, while supporting the judgment impugned submits that no
exception can be taken in the matter of suspension of sentence and grant of
bail, regard being had to the nature and the gravity of offence found proved
against the present appellant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop, all the facts and
circumstances of the case coupled with the fact of incarceration of the
appellant, benefit of suspension of sentence and enlargement of co-appellant
Gaurav S/o Mahesh on bail in the same crime number and the possibility of
final hearing of this appeal in near future is bleak, without expressing any
conclusive opinion on merits, I find it to be a fit case to suspend the
remaining custodial sentence of the applicant.
Accordingly, application is allowed. Subject to deposit of fine amount,
if not already deposited the remaining jail sentence during the pendency of
3 CRA-11381-2024
the revision is hereby suspended and it is directed that appellant be released
on bail on his furnishing personal bond in sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One
Lac Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of
learned trial Court for compliance with following conditions:-
(1) The appellant shall deposit the amount of fine (if not deposited)
forthwith;
(2) The appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on 18/03/2025
and on such further dates as may be directed by the Trial Court;
(3) The appellant shall ensure hearing of the appeal on the date fixed
for such hearing and shall also ensure proper legal representation on his
behalf, on the date notified for hearing.
In case of breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, this order
granting suspension of sentence shall become ineffective. The Trial Court
shall be authorized to grant exemption from attendance to the appellant on
any date, on sufficient cause being shown [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 2
of the M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
Where the appellant do not appear on the date of his appearance before
the Trial Court and no sufficient cause for non-appearance is shown, the
Trial Court shall be authorized to issue non-bailable / bailable warrants to
secure his attendance under intimation to the Registry of High Court.
The Trial Court shall also proceed under Section 446 of Cr.P.C. /
Section 491 of BNSS, 2023 against such appellant and his surety without any
reference to this Court and without any impediment of the order granting
bail. [Chapter XIII Rule 42 Sub-Rule 3 of M.P. High Court Rules, 2008].
4 CRA-11381-2024
On arrest / surrender in compliance with the warrant, the appellant
shall be forwarded in custody to undergo sentence of imprisonment under
intimation to the Registry of this Court.
Accordingly, the I.A. stands allowed and disposed off.
Registry is directed to list the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE
rcp
