Mangalchand vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 15320 Raj

(1 of 3) [CRLAS-883/2021]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 883/2021 S.B. Criminal Misc. Application for Suspension of Sentence No.591/2021

1. Mangalchand S/o Lt. Devji, Aged About 84 Years, B/c Purohit, R/o Sawai Choti, Ps Sardarsahar, Dist. Churu. (Presently Lodged At Dist. Jail, Churu).

2. Ramchandra S/o Lt. Magaram Ji, Aged About 47 Years, B/ c Jat, R/o Sawai Badi, Ps Sardarsahar, Dist. Churu. (Presently Lodged At Dist. Jail, Churu).

                                                                  ----Appellants
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)          :     Mr. ML Vishnoi
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Arun Kumar, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA Order

01/10/2021

Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicants as well as

learned Public Prosecutor, on application for suspension of

sentences.

By the instant application preferred under Section 389

Cr.P.C., applicant-appellants have craved for suspending the

sentences handed down by learned Special Judge, NDPS Case

Churu (for short, 'learned trial Court'), by its verdict dated

18.09.2021 in Sessions Case No.01/2009. Learned trial Court, by

the aforesaid verdict, convicted the applicant-appellants for

offences under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act.

Arguing on the application for suspension of sentences, it is

submitted by learned counsel that the accused appellants have

convicted for the offence under Section 8/18 of the NDPS Act. The

(2 of 3) [CRLAS-883/2021]

accused appellant Mangal Chand is 84 years of age. Learned

counsel further submits that the accused appellant No.1 remained

in custody for 02 months and 18 days and accused appellant

Ramchandra remained in custody for 03 months and 16 days.

Learned counsel further stated that as per the judgment itself,

there were no criminal antecedents of the accused appellants and

only 500-500 grms of opium has been recovered from the accused

appellants, which is also below commercial quantity and the

hearing of appeal will take time. Learned counsel for the appelants

further submits that the accused appellants are behind the bar

from the date of the judgment i.e. 18.09.2021. Learned counsel

for the accused appellants, therefore prays that sentence of the

accused appellants may be therefore suspended and it would not

be appropriate to keep applicant-appellants under further

incarceration.

Per contra learned Public Prosecutor has fervently and

vehemently opposed the application for suspension of sentences

and stated that offence was proved by the prosecution evidence

and, therefore, the accused appellants were convicted.

Having regard the facts and circumstances of the case and

also considering the fact that the recovered quantity is below

commercial quantity and the hearing of appeal may take time, I

feel inclined to accept this application for suspension of sentence.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentences passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Churu,

vide judgment dated 18.09.2021, in Sessions Case No.01/2009

(3 of 3) [CRLAS-883/2021]

against appellant-applicants (1) Mangal Chand S/o Late Devji and

(2) Ramchandra S/o Late Maga Ramji, shall remain suspended till

final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on

bail, provided they execute personal bond in the sum of

Rs.2,00,000/- each with two sound and solvent sureties of

Rs.1,00,000/-each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for

their appearance in this Court on 08.11.2021 and whenever

ordered to do so till disposal of the appeal, on the conditions

indicated below:-

1. That they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicants change the place of residence, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of

accused-applicants in a separate file. Such file be registered as

Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-

applicants were tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also

be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall

not be taken into account for statistical purposes relating to

pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said

accused applicant does not appear before the trial court, the

learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for

cancellation of bail.

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J

4-Ns/Hanuman/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)