Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sanju Sanjeev Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan on 27 January, 2022
Bench: Vinod Kumar Bharwani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 703/2020
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1244/2018
Sanju Sanjeev Kumar S/o Sh. Bala Ram, Aged About 33 Years,
B/c Upadhyay R/o H.n 182/1 Lakkarpeetha Nayapura Road Near
Mandsour Near Btb Office W.no. 14 Ps- City Kotwali Mandsour
(Mp) (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Ajmer)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.R.S. Gill, through VC
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudhir Tak, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Order
27/01/2022
The instant application for suspension of sentence under
Section 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-
applicant Sanju Sanjeev Kumar S/o Sh. Bala Ram, who has been
convicted and sentenced for the offences under Sections 471 and
120B of the IPC and Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act vide the
judgment dated 29.09.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge,
NDPS Cases, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No.37/2016.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
As per the prosecution case, the appellant was apprehend
with 7 bags of contraband poppy husk weighing 148 Kgs when the
(2 of 4) [SOSA-703/2020]
search was conducted by the SHO PS Rayla, District Bhilwara. The
appellant has served actual sentence of five years one month and
four days till 17.01.2022 whereafter this application for SOS has
been moved.
Learned Public Prosecutor was instructed to place on record
the antecedent report of the appellant. As per the report received
from the SHO Police Station Rayla, District Bhilwara and Police
Station Rayla, no case other than the present one has been
registered against the appellant. The appellanthas remained in
custody for more than five years. Hon'ble the Supreme Court
considered the concept of grant of bail on account of prolonged
custody 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).
In the case of Manohar Lal (supra), the custodial period of
more than five years was considered sufficient to grant bail to the
said accused. There are bleak chances of early disposal of the
appeal and if the accused is not extended indulgence of bail, he is
likely to serve out the sentences awarded to him by the trial court.
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-703/2020]
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, Bhilwara, vide judgment dated 29.09.2018 in
Sessions Case No.37/2016 against the appellant-applicant Sanju
Sanjeev Kumar S/o Sh. Bala Ram 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 01.03.2022 and whenever ordered to do so till the
disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the
month of January of every year till the appeal is
decided.
2. That if the applicant changes the place of
residence, he will give in writing his 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 in a separate file. Such file be
registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which
the accused-applicant was 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 does not appear before the trial
(4 of 4) [SOSA-703/2020]
court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High
Court for cancellation of bail.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J
45-Mamta/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
