Allowed

Suresh v. State

Rajasthan HC30 Aug 2018SOSA/845/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court allowed the appellant's second application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. while his appeal against conviction and sentence for an NDPS offence was pending. The convict was released on bail subject to specific conditions including personal bond and appearance before the trial court annually.

What did the court decide?

The sentence of the Special Court is suspended, and the appellant is released on bail subject to furnishing a bond of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs.50,000 each and complying with specified atten

Suresh Vs State — Narcotics (NDPS) | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 845/2018

¶3

¶4

S.B. Criminal Appeal No.321/2018

¶5

Suresh S/o Kanhaiya Lal Sharma, aged about 28 years, Lumadi, PS Mansa, Dist Nimach (MP).

¶6

(Presently lodged in Dist Jail, Chittorgarh)

¶7

----Appellant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Rajasthan through PP

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Birbal Saran. For Respondent(s) : Mr. O.P. Rathi, PP.

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA

¶13

Order

¶14

30/08/2018

¶15

Accused-appellant has laid this second application for suspension of sentence handed down by the learned trial Court while convicting him for offence under Section 8 read with Section 18 of the NDPS Act.

¶16

It is submitted by learned counsel that as a matter of fact there was no recovery of contraband (opium) from the conscious possession of the appellant. Learned counsel would contend that alternatively also as per prosecution case recovery of contraband is 1 Kg., which is far below commercial quantity. Lastly, learned counsel submits that the learned trial Court has handed down maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment and appellant has served sentence for almost eight months and final hearing in the

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[SOSA-845/2018]

¶19

appeal is likely to take considerable time. Learned counsel has further contended that except the conviction in instant matter there is no other criminal antecedent of the appellant. He has, therefore, urged that sentence may be suspended.

¶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 Bar.

¶22

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

¶23

Accordingly, the second 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 No.2, Chittorgarh, vide judgment dated 01.02.2018, in Sessions Case No.165/2014 (112/2011), against appellantapplicant, Suresh S/o Kanhaiya Lal Sharma, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to the condition that he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, including one local surety, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 03.10.2018 and whenever ordered to do so till disposal of the appeal, on the conditions indicated below:-

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

(3 of 3)

¶27

[SOSA-845/2018]

¶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

a.asopa/-116

Suresh v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh v. State

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

Padam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Prem Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Ghanshyam Das Vaishnava Vs Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation

Ramjiwan Vs Chairman and Md., Rsrtc and Ors.

Hansa Ram Kumhar Vs State of Rajasthan

Kalpana Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan