Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sadasukh vs State Of Rajasthan on 26 April, 2022
Bench: Devendra Kachhawaha
(1 of 4) [SOSA-59/2022]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Suspension of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 59/2022
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1114/2020
Sadasukh S/o Hanumanram, Aged About 30 Years, By Caste
Vishnoi, R/o Vishnu Nagar Rajod, Police Thana Kuchera, District
Nagaur.
(At Present Lodged in Central Jail, Ajmer).
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.L. Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shrawan Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA
Order
26/04/2022
This present application for suspension of sentences under
Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-
applicant - Sadasukh who has been convicted and sentenced vide
judgment and order dated 11.11.2020 passed by the learned
Special Judge, NDPS Cases (Court of Additional Sessions Judge
No.1), Nagaur in Sessions Case No.43/2019 for the offence
punishable under Sections 8/15 of the NDPS Act.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant-applicant
and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available
on record.
Arguing on the application for suspension of sentences, it is
submitted by learned counsel for the applicant-appellant that
(2 of 4) [SOSA-59/2022]
during the cross-examination (available at internal Page No.5),
PW-1 - Sunil Choudhary (I.O.) admitted that signatures of the
petitioner are not available on Ex.P/6 and Ex.P/7 and also stated
that signatures of the appellant-applicant are not required on that
memos whereas, Ex.P/6 is a memo regarding sample of seal and
Ex.P/7 is a memo regarding destruction of sample seal which were
admittedly, prepared in the presence of the petitioner and in the
interest of justice, it must be required that these type of relevant
memos must be signed by the accused as decided by this Court in
S.B. Criminal Suspension of Sentences Application (Appeal)
No.501/2020 vide order dated 01.10.2021 titled as "Hanumana
Ram S/o Luna Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan".
Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant further stated
that independent panchas were not procured by the prosecution,
only one panch witness was adduced in the evidence; appellant is
behind the bars since 5 years and 6 months. Lastly, learned
counsel has submitted that decision of the appeal is likely to take
considerable time, and, therefore, it would not be appropriate to
keep applicant-appellant under further incarceration. With these
submissions, learned counsel for the appellant-applicant prayed
that the present application for suspension of sentences may be
allowed and the appellant-applicant may kindly be ordered to be
released on bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application
of suspension of sentences filed on behalf of the accused-appellant
and stated that the recovered contraband in question is of
commercial quantity.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,
particularly looking to the fact that signatures of the appellant-
(3 of 4) [SOSA-59/2022]
applicant were not obtained by the investigating officer, as stated
above; that as stated by this Court in the order dated 01.10.2021
passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No.501/2020, signature of the accused is relevant and
necessary; and the fact that hearing of the appeal will take time,
therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to enlarge
the applicant-appellant on bail while allowing the present
application for suspending his sentences.
Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of
sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
ordered that the sentences passed by learned Special Judge,
NDPS Cases (Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.1), Nagaur in
Sessions Case No.43/2019 against the appellant-applicant -
Sadasukh S/o Hanumanram, shall remain suspended till final
disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail
subject to the condition that he shall furnish a personal bond in
the sum of ₹2,00,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties (out
of which one shall be a blood relative/close relative) of
₹1,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for
his appearance in this Court on 27.05.2022 and whenever ordered
to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated
below:-
1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court
in the month of January of every year till the appeal is
decided.
2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of
residence, he/she/they will give in writing
his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as
well as to the counsel in the High Court.
(4 of 4) [SOSA-59/2022]
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
the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered
as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the
accused-applicant(s) was/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 purpose
relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In
case the said accused applicant(s) 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
114-Arvind/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
