Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Vijay vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:13839) on 12 March, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:13839]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 379/2025
1. Vijay S/o Omprakash, Aged About 43 Years, R/o House
No. 146/06, Samajwad Nagar, Police Station Chatripura,
District Indore (Mp) (Confined In District Jail, Pratapgarh)
2. Sandeep S/o Anil, Aged About 43 Years, R/o House No.
264 A, Usha Nagar, Police Station Annaduni, District
Indore (Mp). (Confined In District Jail, Pratapgarh)
3. Gajendra S/o Raghunath, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Samajwad Nagar, Gali No. 2, Police Station Chatripura,
District Indore (Mp) (Confined In District Jail, Pratapgarh)
4. Jeevan S/o Ramchandra, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Ram
Mandir Ki Pal, Babu Murai Colony, Halod, Police Station
Aerodrum, District Indore (Mp) (Confined In District Jail,
Pratapgarh)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manohar Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Singh Kumpawat, Asst. to
Mr. Deepak Choudhary, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
12/03/2025
Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned
Asst. to Addl. Advocate General and perused the material available
on record.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the recovered
contraband is below commercial quantity and the appellants were on
[2025:RJ-JD:13839] (2 of 3) [SOSA-379/2025]
bail during the trial and hearing of the appeal will take sufficient long
time. Therefore, the sentence may kindly be suspended.
Learned Asst. to Addl. Advocate General opposed the prayer
made by the counsel for the appellants.
Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of
the appellants and having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case, the appellants were on bail during the trial, therefore, this
Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the
sentences awarded to the accused appellants.
Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentence in the judgment dated 28.01.2025 passed by the learned
Special Judge NDPS Act Cases, Pratapgarh, in Sessions Case
No.29/2016, against the appellants-applicants (1) Vijay S/o
Omprakash, (2) Sandeep S/o Anil, (3) Gajendra S/o Raghunath &
(4) Jeevan S/o Ramchandra, shall remain suspended till final
disposal of the aforesaid appeal and they will be released on bail,
provided he executes personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with
two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned
trial Judge for their appearance in this court on 16.04.2025 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.
[2025:RJ-JD:13839] (3 of 3) [SOSA-379/2025]
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 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.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
205-Ishan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
