Allowed

Ravi Kant @ Ravi v. State

Rajasthan HC22 Oct 2018SOSA/547/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. The High Court granted a stay on the substantive sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment pending the Larger Bench decision on narcotic mixture calculation, conditioned on bond execution and appearance requirements.

What did the court decide?

Suspended substantive sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment till final disposal of appeal, conditioned upon personal bond of Rs.50,000 with sureties and periodic appearance before the trial cour

Ravi Kant @ Ravi Vs State — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 547/2018

¶3

Ravi Kant @ Ravi S/o Shri Brij Lal, By Caste Meghwal, R/o Kulchandra, P.s. Tibbi, District Hanumangarh. (Lodged In District Jail, Hanumangarh)

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	J.S. Bhaleria
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	L.R. Upadhyay, P.P.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

¶10

Order

¶11

22/10/2018

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentence.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 8/22 of the NDPS Act and sentenced for ten years’ rigorous imprisonment by the trial court while holding that he was in possession of 5000 tablet of Alprazolam, the total weight of which is 750 gms.

¶14

It is contended by counsel for the appellant that it is not the total weight of the substance allegedly recovered that is material, but the percentage content of narcotic substance translated into weight that is relevant. It is argued that narcotic substance of 5000 Alprazolam Tablets comes to 25 grams only, which is less than commercial quantity.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.722/2017 ( Hira Singh & Anr.

¶16

(2 of 3) [SOSA-547/2018]

¶17

vs. Union of India and Anr.), reported in (2017) 8 SCC 162 has

¶18

referred the following question to the Larger Bench:-

¶19

“Does the Act envisage that the mixture of narcotic drug and seized material/substance should be considered as a preparation in totality or on the basis of the actual drug content of the specified narcotic drug?”

¶20

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is in custody since 26.01.2016 and as such he has already undergone more than two and half years of the sentence out of the total sentence awarded to him. It is also submitted that hearing of the appeal is likely to take time, therefore, sentence of the appellant be suspended.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer of learned counsel for the appellant, however admitted that the question, regarding mixture of narcotic drugs and seized material/substance should be considered as a preparation in totality or on the basis of the actual drug content of the specified narcotic drug, is pending before the Larger Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶22

Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, I consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the accused appellant.

¶23

Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court vide judgment dated 02.02.2018 in Sessions Case No.26/2016 against appellant Ravi Kant @ Ravi S/o Shri Brij Lal shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 26.11.2018 and whenever

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[SOSA-547/2018]

¶26

ordered to do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶27

That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

¶28

That if the appellant 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.

¶29

Similarly, if the sureties change their address, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

¶30

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-appellant 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶31

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶32

Taruna

Ravi Kant @ Ravi v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Kant @ Ravi v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sawai Singh Rajpurohit Vs State and Anr.

Sahadev Vs State of Rajasthan

Nirmal Kumar Soni Vs State and Anr.

Satya Narayan Vs State and Ors.

Maya Rathore Vs State and Anr.