On appeal against conviction and sentencing, the court dismissed the appeal as barred by non-prosecution due to failure to serve summons respondents after four years.
Ap leal dismissed for non-prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~8
versus
SATKHOLAL & ANR ..... Respondents Through None
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
O R D E R % 03.10.2018
Respondent nos. 1 and 2 pleaded guilty before the trial court. They
were convicted under Section 25A of the NDPS Act (“the Act”, for short) read with Section 29 of the Act. Respondent no. 1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of ` 1 lac each for the aforesaid offences. It was further ordered that in case of default of payment of fine, he shall face simple imprisonment for three months for each of the offences.
Keeping in view that respondent no. 2 was about 62 years of age, a widow with three minor children and was having poor financial background; trial court sentenced her to the period already undergone by her in jail.
Aggrieved by the sentences handed down to the respondents, appellant has filed this appeal in the year 2014. Appeal was first taken up for hearing on 18th November, 2014 and respondents were summoned. Despite the fact that four years have gone by, appellant has failed to serve the respondents. From time to time appellant was given opportunity to trace out the addresses of respondents. Even process fee was not filed pursuant to the orders dated 22nd May, 2017 and 24th July, 2018. Vide order dated 24th July, 2018 last opportunity was granted to the appellant to serve respondents but to no effect.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that fresh addresses of respondents could not be located.
Be that as it may, in my view four years is sufficient time to trace out the addresses and serve the respondents.
Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
OCTOBER 03, 2018 r.bararia
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal appeal is maintainable when respondents cannot be served despite four years of delay.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Narcotics Control Bureau
Satkholal & Anr.
A.K. Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
