Allowed

Dashrath v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Sept 2018SOSA/749/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this S.B. Suspension appeal, the High Court allowed the appellant's second application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. to suspend the twelve-year rigorous imprisonment sentence imposed for NDPS offences. The Court incurred the release pending final disposal of the appeal while the appellant was to execute a bond and maintain residence.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail by suspending sentence pending final disposal of appeal with Rs. 50,000/- bond and two sureties.

Dashrath Vs State of Rajasthan — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 749/2018

¶3

¶4

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 737 / 2017

¶5

Dashrath S/o Shri Karulal, Aged About 30 Years, B/c Nai, Bori, P.s. Rathajna, Distt. Pratapgarh (Raj) (Present Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)

¶6

----Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.L. Bishnoi. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, Public Prosecutor.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA

¶12

Order

¶13

04/09/2018

¶14

Appellant-applicant has preferred this second application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of sentence awarded by Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Pratapgarh, (for short, ‘learned trial Court’) by its judgment dated 6^th of March, 2017. The learned trial Court by the impugned order has indicted appellantapplicant for offence under 8/18 of the NDPS and handed down sentence of rigorous imprisonment for twelve years with fine of Rs.1,50,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to undergo sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year.

¶15

The first application of appellant-applicant was dismissed on 16.02.2018.

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

[SOSA-749/2018]

¶18

Arguing on this second application for suspension of sentence, it is precisely argued by learned counsel that appellant has remained in custody for almost four years and six months out of the total sentence of twelve years, and therefore, solely on the ground of prolonged custody and the fact that final hearing of the appeal is not in offing, his sentence is liable to be suspended. In support thereof, learned counsel has placed reliance on a decision of Supreme Court in case of Thana Singh V/s. Central Bureau of Narcotics [(2013) 2 SCC 603].

¶19

Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence.

¶20

I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments advanced at Bar by learned counsel for the parties.

¶21

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the prolonged custody of appellant, I feel persuaded to accept this second application for suspension of sentence.

¶22

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Pratapgarh, vide judgment dated 06.03.2017, in Sessions Case No.22/2014 against appellant-applicant Dashrath S/o Shri Karulal, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to the condition that he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 05.10.2018 and whenever ordered to do so till disposal of the appeal, on the conditions indicated

(3 of 3)

[SOSA-749/2018]

below:-

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

¶27

That if the applicant 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.

¶28

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

¶29

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accusedapplicant 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 purposes relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial Court. In case the said accused-applicant does not appear before the trial Court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶30

Twinkle Singh/133

Dashrath v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dashrath v. State of Rajasthan

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

Kalpana Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunil Acharya Vs State

Arvind Singh Vs State

Ramesh Godara Vs State

Naveen Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan