Mohanram vs State Of Rajasthan
2025 Latest Caselaw 11538 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Mohanram vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 April, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
 S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence (Appeal) Application
                               No.669/2025

                                       in

             S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 724/2025

1.     Mohanram S/o Gayanram Ji, Aged About 47 Years, R/o
       Ranasar Tehsil Kuchaman, Dist. Didwana- Kuchaman.
       (Presently Lodged At District Jail, Didwana)
2.     Sukharam S/o Chunaram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
       Ranasar Tehsil Kuchaman, Dist. Didwana- Kuchaman.
       (Presently Lodged At District Jail, Didwana)
                                                                 ----Appellants
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. Mangilal Vishnoi
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, DyGA



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

16/04/2025

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicantS in the matter of judgment

dated 09.04.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act

Cases, Kuchaman City, District Deedwana Kuchaman in Sessions

Case No.19/2022 (02/2011) whereby each of them was convicted

and sentenced to suffer 10 years' RI alongwith a fine of

Rs.1,00,000/- under Section 8/15(B) of NDPS Act.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that

the learned trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and

factual aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous

(2 of 3)

conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be

appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court. The

appellants were granted bail during trial and did not misuse the

liberty so granted to them; 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 by learned counsel for the accused-

applicants for releasing the appellants on application for

suspension of sentence.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. Considering the submission with regard to total non-

compliance of mandatory provisions of NDPS Act and further the

fact that embargo contained under Section 32A and 37 of NDPS

Act is not attracted in this case as well as considering that hearing

of the appeal would likely to take a long time and further

considering the submission that during trial, they remained on bail

and did not misuse the liberty so granted to them, this court is of

the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence

awarded to the accused-appellants.

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentence passed by learned trial court, the details of which are

provided in the first para of this order, against the appellant-

applicants named above shall remain suspended till final disposal

of the aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on bail provided

each of them executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-

(3 of 3)

with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the

learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 15.05.2025

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.

7. 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 court, the

learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for

cancellation of bail.

(FARJAND ALI),J 130-Pramod/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)