Allowed
Vijendra S/O Shri Dayachand B/C Jat v. State of Rajasthan
Rajasthan HCSOSA/40/2020
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR…
What the court decided
AI extract
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR…
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.
[2024:RJ-JP:23117]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 40/2020
In
Criminal Appeal No.49/2020
Vijendra S/o Shri Dayachand, R/o Deegli Police Station Hamirwas Distt. Churu At Present In Central Jail Ajmer.
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vinay Pal Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Sharma, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Order
16/05/2024
The instant application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been preferred on behalf of the applicantappellant, who has been convicted for the offences under Section(s) 8/15 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo twenty years rigorous imprisonment with fine, vide judgment dated 10.12.2019 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Camp Nasirabad, District Ajmer, in NDPS Case No.01/2019.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant-appellant submits that the applicant was not on bail during trial and he is behind the bars since long time. Counsel further submits that the inventory report has not been exhibited and therefore he did not get the opportunity to cross examine the same. The learned Trial Court has not appreciated the facts and circumstances of the case
[2024:RJ-JP:23117]
[SOSA-40/2020]
(2 of 3)
holistically and the hearing of the appeal will take its own time, hence, the sentence awarded to the applicant-appellant may be suspended during the pendency of the appeal.
The appellant has remained in custody for more than six years. Hon’ble the Supreme Court had considered the concept of grant of bail on account of prolonged custody in the cases of Saudan Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh {Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4633/2021 decided on 05.10.2021}, Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors. [MANU/SC/0851/2022], in the case of Manohar Lal Ainani vs State of Rajasthan and Anr. {Petition for Special leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.2893/2021 decided on 15.11.2021}, the custodial period of more than five years was considered sufficient to grant bail to the said accused.
There are bleak chances of early disposal of the appeal and if the accused is not extended indulgence of bail, he is likely to serve out the sentence awarded to him by the Trial Court. As a consequence, I am of the firm opinion that condition(s) of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, is duly satisfied.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
In this background and having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to enlarge the applicant-appellant on bail by suspending his sentence during the pendency of the appeal.
Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
[2024:RJ-JP:23117]
[SOSA-40/2020]
(3 of 3)
ordered that the sentence awarded by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Camp Nasirabad, District Ajmer, in NDPS Case No.01/2019 against the applicant-appellant, namely Vijendra S/o Shri Dayachand, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, subject to the condition that he shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Judge for his appearance before this court on 18.06.2024 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J
SAURABH /08
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the sentence of a convict in custody over six years should be suspended under Section 389 Cr.P.C. pending appeal despite Section 37 NDPS restrictions.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Saudan Singh vs State of Uttar PradeshRelied on
{Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4633/2021 decided on 05.10.2021}
Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Ors.Relied on
[MANU/SC/0851/2022]
Manohar Lal Ainani vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.Relied on
{Petition for Special leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.2893/2021 decided on 15.11.2021}
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Vijendra
State of Rajasthan
Vinod Kumar Bharwani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court