Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rampratap @ Pappu vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:42281) on 20 September, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:42281]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1578/2025
1. Rampratap @ Pappu S/o Jelaram, Aged About 49 Years,
R/o Chak Harisinghvala Police Station Sangriya District
Hanumangarh.
(At Present Lodged In Jail Bikaner)
2. Hanuman Prasad S/o Bhajanlal, Aged About 59 Years, R/o
Malarampura, P.s. Sangriya, District Hanumangarh.
(At Present Lodged In Jail Bikaner)
3. Ramniwas S/o Jagdish, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
Malarampura, P.s. Sangriya, District Hanumangarh
(At Present Lodged In Jail Bikaner)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sihag
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
20/09/2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants-applicants as well
as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on
record.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants-applicants submits that
the quantity of narcotic substance recovered was below
commercial quantity and the recovery has been effected from the
car and not from the conscious possession of the appellants-
applicants. He further submits that there is non-compliance of
Section 52-A of the NDPS Act in the case in hand and that there
are no criminal antecedents of the appellants-applicants and they
(Uploaded on 20/09/2025 at 03:38:21 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:42281] (2 of 3) [SOSA-1578/2025]
were on bail during the course of trial. He further submits that
considering the recovery being below commercial quantity, the
punishment imposed is 4 years' rigorous imprisonment by the
learned Trial Court. He thus prays for allowing of application for
suspension of sentence.
3. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor opposes the
application for suspension of sentence and submits that the
learned Trial Court has considered each and every aspect of the
matter and after considering the entire evidence threadbare and
ensuring of the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, 1985, the
conviction order has been passed, and therefore, the appellants-
applicants are not entitled for any indulgence whatsoever.
4. Upon consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of
both the sides and having perused the entire record, including the
facts that there are certain arguable points with regard to the non-
compliance of the NDPS Act, 1985 in the case in hand, the
punishment imposed is 4 years', the appellants-applicants were on
bail during the course of trial, the recovered substance is below
commercial quantity as well as the chances of hearing of appeal in
near future being bleak, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit
case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused
appellants-applicants.
5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section Section 430 of BNSS is allowed and it is ordered
that the sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS
Cases(Additional Sessions Judge) Rawatsar District Hanumangarh
vide judgment dated 08.08.2025 in Special Session Case No.
03/2020 against the applicants Rampratap @ Pappu S/o Jelaram,
(Uploaded on 20/09/2025 at 03:38:21 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:42281] (3 of 3) [SOSA-1578/2025]
Hanuman Prasad S/o Bhajanlal and Ramniwas S/o Jagdish shall
remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and
they shall be released on bail, provided each of them execute a
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 his appearance in this Court on 28.10.2025 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.
6. 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/do not appear before the
trial Court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the
High Court for cancellation of bail.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J
141-charul/-
(Uploaded on 20/09/2025 at 03:38:21 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
