Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dinesh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:18936) on 15 April, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:18936]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1554/2024
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1825/2024
Dinesh S/o Jaisukh Ram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Janglu, P..s
Panchu, Dist. Bikaner, At Present Residing At 05 No. Road,
Puniya, Chowk, Rani Bazar, P.s. Gangashahar, Dist. Bikaner (At
Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1691/2024
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1977/2024
Shivlal S/o Hadmanaram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Tejaji
Mandir, Choudhary Colony, Gangashahar, Police Station
Gangashahar, Bikaner (Raj) (Confined In Sub Jail, Gulabpura)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.L. Vishnoi
Mr. B.R. Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sri Ram Choudhary, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
15/04/2025
[2025:RJ-JD:18936] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1554/2024]
1. The instant applications for suspension of sentences have
been moved on behalf of the applicants. They are convicted by the
judgment dated 08.11.2024 by the learned Special Judge, NDPS
Act Cases (ASJ), Gulabpura District Bhilwara in Special Case
No.17/2021 whereby they were sentenced as under:-
Name of the Offence for Substantive Fine and default
accused which sentence sentence
convicted
Shivlal Section 8/15 10 Years' RI Fine of Rs.1,00,000/-
NDPS Act and in default of
payment of fine,
additional six months
RI.
Section 8/25 10 Years' RI Fine of Rs.1,00,000/-
NDPS Act and in default of
payment of fine,
additional six months
RI.
Dinesh Section 8/15 10 Years' RI Fine of Rs.1,00,000/-
NDPS Act and in default of
payment of fine,
additional six months
RI.
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner 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.
Hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the
application for suspension of sentence may be granted.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the
prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-appellants.
4. Perusal of the record reflects that on 11.10.2020 team of
the SHO, Police Station Badnor intercepted an unnumbered Ertica
Car and interrogated the persons sitting therein upon which they
[2025:RJ-JD:18936] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1554/2024]
disclosed their names as Shivlal (driver) and Dinesh (Khalasi).
During search of the vehicle, six plastic bags weighing 120 kg
Poppy Husk got recovered. After search and seizure both the
accused were arrested and a case under the NDPS Act got
registered. However, serious issues have been raised regarding
non-compliance with the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act,
specifically Sections 42, 50, 52A, and 55 of the NDPS Act.
5. This Court, being the first appellate court, is required to
reassess the entire evidence, particularly in light of the alleged
procedural lapses which, if proved, may go to the root of the
prosecution case. It is well settled that non-compliance with
mandatory provisions under the NDPS Act can vitiate the very
foundation of seizure and recovery.
6. Considering the overall submissions of the parties and
looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case while
refraining from passing any comments on the niceties of the
matter and the fact that the appellants are in custody since
11.10.2020 and in view of the legal issues raised and the
requirement of thorough re-appreciation of evidence, the embargo
under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not attracted in the present
circumstances. this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for
suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-appellants.
7. Accordingly, the applications for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is ordered that the
sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases,
Gulabpura District Bhilwara vide judgment dated 08.11.2024 in
Sessions Case No.17/2021 against the appellant-applicants-
[2025:RJ-JD:18936] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1554/2024]
Dinesh S/o Jaisukh and Shivlal S/o Hadmanaram shall remain
suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeals and they shall
be released on bail provided each of them 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 their
appearance in this court on 19.05.2025 and whenever ordered to
do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated
below:-
1. That they will appear before the trial Court in the month of
January of every year till the appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicants change the place of residence, they will
give in writing their changed address to the trial Court as well as
to their counsel(s) 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-applicants in a separate file. Such file be registered as
Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-
applicants 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-applicants do 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
86-mamta/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
