Coram P.K. LOHRA allowed second application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence in an NDPS case due to prolonged custody, releasing appellant on personal bond.
Sentence suspended; appellant released on personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 847/2018
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 990 / 2017
Lachhu @ Laxman Meena S/o Khetaram, Aged About 50 Years, B/c Meena, R/o Kodarwadiya, P.S. Kanod, Dist. Udaipur
----Petitioner
Versus
State, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hardev Ram Bishnoi. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, Public Prosecutor.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA
Order
04/09/2018
Appellant-applicant has preferred this second application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of sentence awarded by Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Balotra, District Barmer (for short, ‘learned trial Court’) by its judgment dated 1st of July, 2017. The learned trial Court by the impugned order has indicted appellantapplicant for offence under 8/15 of the NDPS and handed down sentence of rigorous imprisonment for fifteen years with fine of Rs.1,50,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to undergo sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year.
The first application of appellant-applicant was dismissed on 02.02.2018.
Arguing on this second application for suspension of sentence, it is precisely argued by learned counsel for the
(2 of 3)
[SOSA-847/2018]
appellant-applicant that appellant remained in custody for almost five years and nine months, 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].
Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence.
I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments advanced at Bar by learned counsel for the parties.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the prolonged custody of the appellant, I feel persuaded to accept this second application for suspension of 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, Balotra, District Barmer vide judgment dated 01.07.2017, in Sessions Case No.20/2016 against appellant-applicant Lachhu @ Laxman Meena S/o Khetaram, 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 of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 04.10.2018 and whenever ordered to do so till disposal of the appeal, on the conditions indicated below:-
(3 of 3)
[SOSA-847/2018]
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.
Twinkle Singh/135
1 issue framed by the court
Whether sentence awarded in NDPS case should be suspended due to prolonged custody despite pending appeal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Thana Singh V/s. Central Bureau of NarcoticsRelied on¶19
(2013) 2 SCC 603 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Lachhu @ Laxman Meena
State
P.K. LOHRA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
P.K. LOHRA
Parties & counsel
