Allowed

Surendra Singh @ Lala v. State

Rajasthan HC28 Aug 2018SOSA/801/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal and ordered the suspension of the appellant's sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment pending the final disposal of the appeal. Bail was granted subject to conditions regarding appearance at the trial court and reporting of any change of address.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of sentence passed by the Special Judge till final disposal of the appeal; release on bail subject to personal bond and sureties.

Surendra Singh @ Lala Vs State — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 801/2018

¶3

¶4

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 162 / 2016

¶5

Surendra Singh @ Lala, S/o Bheru Singh R/o Raisinghpura Ps Manasa, Dist Neemuch MP (Central Jail, Ajmer).

----Petitioner

Versus

State, Through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Purohit. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, Public Prosecutor.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA

¶12

Order

¶13

28/08/2018

¶14

Appellant-applicant has preferred this third application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of sentence awarded by Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Bhilwara (for short, ‘learned trial Court’) by its judgment dated 23^rd of December, 2015. The learned trial Court by the impugned order has indicted appellantapplicant for offence under 8/15 of the NDPS and 482 IPC and handed down sentence of rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, 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 20.04.2016 followed by dismissal of second application on 17.02.2018. While dismissing the second application for

¶16

(2 of 4)

¶17

[SOSA-801/2018]

¶18

suspension of sentence, liberty was granted to the appellantapplicant to renew his prayer afresh after three months.

¶19

Arguing on this third application for suspension of sentence, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant-applicant that out of total maximum sentence of ten years’ rigorous imprisonment, appellant-applicant has already remained in custody for more than four years and five months. Learned counsel has further argued that considering the prolonged custody of the appellant, his sentence is liable to be suspended. In support thereof, learned counsel has placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in case of Thana Singh V/s. Central Bureau of Narcotics [(2013) 2 SCC 603]. It is also argued by learned counsel that when the recovery of contraband was made, the appellant was subjected to personal search but the Seizure Officer, while giving notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, has also given third option of search to be undertaken by himself and this aspect has not been examined in right perspective by the learned trial Court. In support thereof, learned counsel has placed reliance on a decision in case of State of Rajasthan V/s. Parmanand [(2014) 5 SCC 345].

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

(3 of 4)

[SOSA-801/2018]

sentence.

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, Bhilwara, vide judgment dated 23.12.2015, in Sessions Case No.22/2014 against appellant-applicant Surendra Singh @ Lala S/o Bheru Singh, 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.1,00,000/- with two sureties including one local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 28.09.2018 and whenever ordered to do so till 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 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.

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

(4 of 4)

¶32

[SOSA-801/2018]

¶33

learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶34

(P.K. LOHRA),J

¶35

Twinkle Singh/87

Surendra Singh @ Lala v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Singh @ Lala 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

Krishna Kant Joshi Vs Rsrtc and Anr.

Ratan Singh Kumpawat Vs Pawan Kumar Goyal and Anr.

Narendra Kumar Harsh Vs Manjeet Singh and Ors.

Ganpat Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Yashnandini Vyas Vs State of Rajasthan

Vijay Kumar Enkhiya Vs Union of India and Ors.