Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 299 (RAJ)

Ved Prakash S/o Sahib Ram v. State of Rajasthan

2018-01-23

P.K.LOHRA

body2018
ORDER : Mr. P.K. Lohra, J. 1. Applicant-appellants have laid these two separate applications for suspension of sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C. By the applications aforesaid, applicant-appellants have craved for suspending the maximum sentence of ten years' rigorous imprisonment handed down by Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Hanumangarh (for short, 'learned trial Court') upon their indictment for offence under Section 8/18(b) of the NDPS Act. Besides substantive sentence, the learned trial Court has also imposed fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- to each of the applicants and in default of payment of fine to undergo sentence for one year's rigorous imprisonment. 2. It is argued by learned counsel for applicant-Ved Prakash, Mr. R.S. Gill, that during trial applicant remained in custody for almost a year and after passing of the impugned judgment he is under incarceration, therefore, he has already served sentence of more than two years. It is also submitted by Mr. Gill that there is no other criminal antecedent of the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that initially prosecution has came up with the case that contraband opium seized in the matter is weighing 3kg 100g inclusive of container but subsequently the same is projected as 3kg 675g, which is a serious discrepancy casting shadow of doubt on the entire investigation. Learned counsel has also submitted that Seizure Officer has not even served notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act to the applicant, and therefore, sans any criminal antecedent of the applicant, his sentence may be suspended. 3. Mr. Mukesh Vyas, espousing cause of applicant-Lal Chand, has submitted that he has served sentence of more than five years and nine months out of the total sentence of ten years' imprisonment. Mr. Vyas has reiterated the other arguments advanced by Mr. Gill. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the applications for suspension of sentence. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned judgment and also examined record of the case. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the sentence awarded, I feel inclined to accept these applications for suspension of sentence. 7. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned judgment and also examined record of the case. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the sentence awarded, I feel inclined to accept these applications for suspension of sentence. 7. Accordingly, the applications for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Hanumangarh, vide judgment dated 22.12.2016, in Sessions Case No. 28/2012 against appellant-applicants (1) Ved Prakash S/o Sahib Ram, and (2) Lal Chand S/o Shri Rajuram, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeals and they shall be released on bail, provided each of them 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 their appearance in this Court on 23.02.2018 and whenever ordered to do so till disposal of the appeal, on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 2. That if the applicants change the place of residence, they will give in writing their changed addresses to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. 3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 8. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of accused-applicants in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicants were 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-applicants do not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.