Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ganpat Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:44109) on 23 October, 2024
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2024:RJ-JD:44109]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 593/2024
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.626/2022
Ganpat Lal S/o Sh. Ramchandra, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Sakriya, Ps. Rathanjna, Dist. Pratapgarh. (Presently Lodged In
Central Jail, Udaipur).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.K. Gaur
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Neeraj Gurjar, AAG assisted by
Mr. Rajesh Bhati, AGA
Mr. Ravindra Bhati, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
23/10/2024
1. The instant third application for suspension of sentence has
been moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment
dated 20.04.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act
Cases, Pratapgarh in Sessions Case No.31/2019 whereby he was
convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment of 19 years under
Sections 8/15 of the NDPS Act alongwith fine of Rs. 1,90,000/-
and in default in payment of fine to further undergo 1 year & 9
months RI. His first and second applications for suspension of
sentence were dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide orders
dated 04.04.2023 & 30.10.2023 passed in SBCRL Misc.SOSA
[2024:RJ-JD:44109] (2 of 5) [SOSA-593/2024]
No.1169/2022 & 1256/2023. Hence, the instant application for
suspension of sentence.
2. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the learned
trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual
aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous
conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be
appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court. He
submitted that the Seizing Officer collected the samples from the
spot and sent to the FSL for its examination thus, Section 52-A of
the NDPS Act has not been complied with. 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. Hearing of the appeal is likely to take long
time, therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be
granted.
3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicant for
releasing the appellant on application for suspension of sentence.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
[2024:RJ-JD:44109] (3 of 5) [SOSA-593/2024]
5. The accused-appellant is behind the bars in this case since
2019 for allegedly having in possession of contraband poppy husk
in commercial quantity. The appeal has been admitted before this
Court wayback in the year 2022 for the purpose of further
appreciation of the evidence and to examine that whether the
finding of guilt is appropriate or not, however, looking to the
voluminous pendency of the cases, there seems no hope of
hearing of the appeal in a near future and now more than five
years have elapsed and the accused is languishing in jail.
6. Serious questions of law have been raised by the defence
viz., non-compliance of the mandatory provisions particularly
Sections 42 & 52-A of the NDPS Act as well a the guidelines issued
by the Govt. Of India vide SO Nos.1/1988 & 1/1989 and for the
purpose of satisfaction, a cursory look has been made over the
manner of recovery and collection of samples.
7. After having gone through the memo of recovery, search and
seizure process and the statements of the witnesses, this Court
feels that indeed there is a substance in the submission of the
defence and this Court feels that if the legal defects pointed out
by the accused are decided in his favour, he would succeed in the
appeal.
8. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case
more particularly the legal defects regarding recovery process, it
is felt that embargo contained under Sections 32 & 37 of the NDPS
Act would not come in the way of releasing the appellant on bail,
[2024:RJ-JD:44109] (4 of 5) [SOSA-593/2024]
this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the
sentence awarded to the accused-appellant.
9. Accordingly, the instant 3rd application for suspension of
sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
ordered that the impugned order of sentence dated 20.04.2022
passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Pratapgarh
in Sessions Case No.31/2019 against the appellant-applicant
Ganpat Lal S/o Ram Chandra 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.50,000/-
with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 03.12.2024
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 addresses, they
will give in writing their changed address to the trial
Court.
10. 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
[2024:RJ-JD:44109] (5 of 5) [SOSA-593/2024]
pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said
accused applicant 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
105-Mamta/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
