Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Angrej Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 2 February, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc II Suspension Of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 696/2021
Angrej Singh S/o Sh. Darshan Singh, Aged About 30 Years, B/c
Jat Sikh, R/o Indrapura, P.s. Sangria, District Hanumangarh,
Rajasthan. (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.L. Bishnoi (through VC)
For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, AGC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Order
02/02/2022
This second application for suspension of sentences under
Section 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-
applicant Angrej Singh who has been convicted and sentenced for
the offences under Sections 8/21, 25 & 29 of the NPDS Act vide
the judgment dated 17.07.2019 passed by learned Special Judge,
NDPS Cases, Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No.52/2016. He is in
custody since 08.10.2016.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant-application, learned
Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
The first application for SOS submitted on behalf of the
appellant was dismissed on 12.12.2019 Now, this second
application for SOS has been moved by counsel Shri Bishnoi. It is
(2 of 4) [SOSA-696/2021]
submitted that the appellant has undergone more than five and
half years of actual imprisonment and thus, more than half of the
sentences has been served out. Shri Vishnoi places reliance on
this Court's order dated 14.01.2022 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc.
Second Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No.441/2021
(Manish vs State of Rajasthan) whereby the sentences awarded to
the said accused was suspended and on the orders passed by
Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Saudan Singh vs State
of Uttar Pradesh (Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.4633/2021 decided on 05.10.2021) and Manohar Lal
Ainani vs State of Rajasthan and Anr (Petition for Special
leave to Appeal (Cri) No.2893/2021 decided on
15.11.2021). Shri Bishnoi thus, urges that the petitioner
deserves indulgence of bail during pendency of appeal.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions
advanced by the petitioner's counsel. However, he too does not
dispute the fact that the appellant has remained in custody in this
case for 5 years and 4 months. He does not have any criminal
antecedents. There is no possibility of early disposal of the appeal.
In the case of Manohar Lal (supra), the custodial period of
six and a half years was considered sufficient to grant bail to the
said accused. There are bleak chances of early disposal of the
appeal. As a consequence, I am of the firm opinion that conditions
of Section 32-A read with Section 37 of the NDPS Act are duly
satisfied.
In this background and having regard to the overall facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that this is a
fit case to enlarge the appellant-applicant on bail by suspending
his sentences during the pendency of the appeal.
(3 of 4) [SOSA-696/2021]
Accordingly, the instant second 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, Sriganganagar, vide judgment dated 17.07.2019 in
Sessions Case No.52/2016 against the appellant-applicant Angrej
Singh S/o Sh. Darshan Singh 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 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 02.03.2022 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.
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
(4 of 4) [SOSA-696/2021]
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.
(SANDEEP MEHTA),J
73-Sudhir Asopa/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
