[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mahesh Pal Alias Sonu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 January, 2026
1 CRA-7372-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 7372 of 2025
(MAHESH PAL ALIAS SONU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 09-01-2026
Shri R. N. Dwivedi - Advocate for the appellant.
Smt. Papiya Ghosh - Panel Lawyer for respondent/ State.
Heard on admission.
The appeal is admitted for hearing.
Also heard on I.A. No.18195 of 2025, which is a first application
under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail to present appellant.
This Criminal Appeal assails the judgment dated 26.07.2025 passed by
the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act, District Narmadapuram (M.P.), in SC
NDPS Case No.11 of 2019, whereby the present appellant has been
convicted for offence punishable under Section 8/20(b)(ii)(b) of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo 03
years RI and fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the learned
trial Court has erred in convicting the present appellant without proper
appreciation of the facts and evidence available on record. It is submitted by
learned counsel for the appellant that he is innocent and falsely implicated.
2 CRA-7372-2025
No compliance under Section 50 of NDPS Act has been made by the
prosecution in this case regarding communication of his right to get
searched by the Magistrate or Gazetted Officer. The bag in which the
contraband material was allegedly found has not been seized and produced in
the Court. It is contended that various contradictions and variations
revealed in the statements of the prosecution witnesses as well as inherent
infirmities renders doubt on the veracity of the prosecution case. He
remained in custody for around 08 months. He relied upon the judgment of
Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and others Vs. State of Gujarat - (1999) 4 SCC
421, and submitted that when a convicted person is sentenced to a fixed
period of sentence and files an appeal under any statutory right, suspension
of sentence can be considered by the appellate Court liberally unless there
are exceptional circumstances. It is further submitted that the final disposal
of this appeal with take considerable time. In view of the aforesaid
submissions, it is prayed that the remaining jail sentence of present appellant
may be suspended and he may be released on bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for State has opposed the prayer made by
the appellant.
Having heard the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties
and perused the record.
It is a case involving seizure of a more than minimum quantity of
contraband 'Ganja' i.e. 5 Kg 250 gms from the possession of the present
appellant. There is ample material on record pertaining to the charges
3 CRA-7372-2025
levelled against the appellant. The learned trial Court has duly considered the
various arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant. The decision
i n Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai (supra) is of no help to the appellant in
view of the attending facts and circumstances of the case. The compliance of
Section 50 of NDPS Act was not needed in this case as the seizure has been
made from the bag not from the person of the present appellant. This Court
having considered the merits as well as attending facts and circumstances of
the case, is not inclined to grant the benefit of suspension of sentence to the
appellant at this stage.
In the present case, having considered the entire material and evidence
on record as well as the contentions advanced by the parties, this Court is of
considered view that this is not a fit case in which suspension of sentence can
be granted at this stage.
Accordingly, I.A. No.18195 of 2025 is hereby dismissed.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
mrs. mishra
