Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mohan Lal vs State Of Rajasthan on 19 December, 2022
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 460/2021
Mohan Lal S/o Sh. Bheru Lal, Aged About 30 Years, By Caste
Bairva, R/o Kishangarh Police Station Kotdi, District Bhilwara. (At
Present Lodged In District Jail, Bhilwara).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.S. Rathore
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Javeed Gauri, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
19/12/2022
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public
Prosecutor on application for suspension of sentence.
Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submits that the
prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case beyond
reasonable doubt, yet, the learned trial Court has reached on an
erroneous conclusion of guilt, as such, the Court below has failed
to appreciate the correct legal and factual aspects of the matter.
He strenuously urged that the NDPS Act is called a draconian law
because of the stringent provision of punishment and that is why
mandatory provisions are required to be complied with stricto
sensu otherwise the recovery vitiates on this count alone. In this
case, the prosecution has failed to comply with the provision of
Section 50 of the NDPS Act. He further submits that there are
several flaws in the prosecution case on the basis of which the
(2 of 4) [SOSA-460/2021]
judgment of conviction is not sustainable. He placed reliance on
the Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s) 2893/21
titled Manohar Lal Ainani Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.,
wherein it was held vide order dated 15.11.2021 that looking to
the prolonged custody period of the petitioner, bail shall be
granted to him in that matter. In another landmark judgment of
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
and Ors. reported in AIR 2022 SC 3386, the aforesaid aspect
has been reiterated. The appeal has already been admitted for
re-appreciation of the evidence and till date the appellant has
served almost 5 years and 3 months of imprisonment therefore,
learned counsel for the appellant submits that the sentence
awarded to the accused-appellant may be suspended as the
hearing of the appeal may take long time to conclude. If the
appeal is not taken up the very purpose of filing the appeal would
be frustrated by keeping the appellant incarcerated.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently
opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-
appellant for suspending the sentences but he too does not
dispute the fact that appellant has been behind the Bars for
almost 5 years and 3 months.
This Court is cognizant of the provisions contained in Section
32-A and Section 37 of the NDPS Act but considering the
submissions made by learned counsel for the accused-appellant
regarding non-compliance of statutory procedure and keeping in
mind the fact of subjection of accused to long period of
incarceration pending appeal, this court deems it fit to grant the
bail to the applicant.
(3 of 4) [SOSA-460/2021]
Upon consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of
the appellant 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 sentences awarded to the accused appellant.
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 Cases,
Bhilwara vide judgment dated in Sessions Case No.07/2018
against the appellant-applicant Mohan Lal S/o Bheru Lal, shall
remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he
shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to
the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this
court on 23.01.2023 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
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
(4 of 4) [SOSA-460/2021]
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
107-Arti/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
