Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Firoj vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 December, 2022
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR.
....
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1724/2022.
1. Firoj S/o Shri Meer Jaman Khan, Aged About 26 Years, R/
o Kanora, Police Station Rathanjana, District Pratapgarh.
(Presently Lodged In District Jail, Pratapgarh)
2. Aabid S/o Shri Abbas Khan, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Kanora, Police Station Rathanjana, District Pratapgarh.
(Presently Lodged In District Jail, Pratapgarh)
3. Shahrukh S/o Shri Noor Mohd., Aged About 24 Years, R/o
Kanora, Police Station Rathanjana, District Pratapgarh.
(Presently Lodged In District Jail, Pratapgarh)
----Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ramesh Purohit.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohd. Javed Gouri, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
08/12/2022
Heard.
Admit. Record has already been received.
Issue notice to the respondent. Learned Public Prosecutor
accepts notice on behalf of State.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned public
prosecutor on application seeking suspension of sentences (SoSA
No. 1202/2022 - Shahrukh S/o Noor Rathanjana).
(2 of 4) [CRLAS-1724/2022]
Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant submits that
no recovery of any contraband was affected from the
applicant/appellant. He has been made accused in this case solely
on the basis of the statement that he was escorting the other co-
accused Sher Khan and Firoz. It is further submitted that the
allegation of the prosecution that after some time of apprehension
of the appellants Shahrukh and the other co-accused Abid on a
motorcycle, the two accused persons Sher Khan and Firoz came at
the place of their interception and these two persons tried to
convey them to run away seems to be very flimsy and
unconvincing because the same thing has not been brought during
the course of the trial. There is serious infirmity in aspect of this
fact which is a sole basis for arraigning of the accused/appellant in
this case. It is submitted that punishment provision in the NDPS
Act is very harsh and that is why, stringent provisions have been
made which are required to be complied with by the Agency
before depriving a person from his life and liberty. Since the sole
basis of booking the accused/applicant in this case is his
admission before the Police Officers which is not admissible as per
the mandate of law under Section 25 & 26 of the Indian Evidence
Act and, therefore, the conviction of the accused/ applicant is not
sustainable in the eye of law. It is further submitted that the
applicant/ appellant was on bail during the entire period of the
trial and there is no complaint regarding misuse of the liberty
granted in his favour. The appellants have a strong arguable case
in their favour and there is every hope for success in appeal.
Therefore, learned counsel for the applicants/appellants submits
that the sentences awarded to the accused-appellant (Shahrukh)
(3 of 4) [CRLAS-1724/2022]
may be suspended as the disposal of the appeal will consume
time.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the accused-
appellant for suspending the sentences.
Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf
of the applicants/appellants and having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is a
fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-
appellants.
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 the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases,
Pratapgarh vide judgment dated 13.10.2022 in Special Sessions
Case No. 1/2020 against the applicants/appellant Shahrukh S/o
Shri Noor Mohd. shall remain suspended till final disposal of the
aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on bail, provided he
executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two
sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned
trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 09.01.2023 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
(4 of 4) [CRLAS-1724/2022]
his/her/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
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.
(FARJAND ALI),J
167-Mohan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
