Dismissed

Smti. Malti Devi v. the Union of India

Gauhati HC10 Aug 2021I.A.(Crl.)/242/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court rejected an application for suspension of sentence and bail under Section 389(2) Cr.P.C. filed by an appellant convicted under the NDPS Act. The court held that despite prima facie incriminating material, bail cannot be granted while the connected appeal is ready for final hearing.

What did the court decide?

Interlocutory application for suspension of sentence and bail rejected; appellant not released.

Smti. Malti Devi Vs the Union of India — Narcotics (NDPS) | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010309342019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/242/2020

¶5

SMTI. MALTI DEVI W/O- SRI SUKHDEV CHOUDHURY R/O- 224 KALADANGA ROAD P.O. KANTIKINAR UNDER JAGDDAL P.S. IN THE DIST. OF 24TH PARAGANA WEST BENGAL

¶6

VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY ASSTT.S.G.I.

¶7

-----------Advocate for : MR. P KATAKI Advocate for : ASSTT.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA

¶8

Linked Case : Crl.A./141/2020

¶9

SMTI. MALTI DEVI W/O- SRI SUKHDEV CHOUDHURY R/O- 224 KALADANGA ROAD P.O. KANTIKINAR UNDER JAGDDAL POLICE STATION DIST.- 24TH PARAGANA WEST BENGAL.

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

Page No.# 2/3

¶12

THE UNION OF INDIA INDIA

¶13

-----------Advocate for : MRS R BEGUM Advocate for : SC NCB appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶15

ORDER

¶16

10.08.2021

¶17

Heard Mr. P. Kataki, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant as well as Ms. P. Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing counsel, NCB.

¶18

By this interlocutory application under Section 389 (2) Cr.P.C., the applicant/appellant, who is convicted and sentenced under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act to undergo R.I. for 10 (ten) years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- in default to undergo S.I. for 1 (one) year vide the impugned Judgment and Order, dated 14.08.2017, passed in NDPS Case No. 16(1) of 2015 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati has prayed for suspension of sentence and to allow him to go on bail.

¶19

On hearing the learned counsel of both sides and perusal of the impugned judgment and order, this Court finds that there is prima facie, sufficient incriminating material against the applicant/appellant, subject, of course, to final hearing in the connected appeal. This Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant/appellant cannot be released on bail by suspending the

¶20

Page No.# 3/3

¶21

sentence passed against him at this stage where the matter is ready for final hearing.

¶22

Accordingly, the interlocutory application stands rejected.

¶23

This disposes of the Interlocutory Application.

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Smti. Malti Devi v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smti. Malti Devi v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saddam Ali Vs the State of Assam

Jiban Khatriya @ Jeevan Khatriya Barman Vs the State of Assam

Sahidul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Hanif Ali Vs the State of Assam

Damodar Deori @ Amarsing Deori and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Ainur Rahman and Anr. Vs the State of Assam