Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 231 (RAJ)

Mukesh Das v. State of Rajasthan, Through PP

2019-01-18

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. The instant third application for suspension of sentence is preferred on behalf of the appellant-applicant Mukesh Das, who has been convicted and sentenced by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases No. 2, Chitttorgarh vide judgment dated 30.05.2017 passed in Sessions Case No. 178/2014 (16/2013). 2. Learned counsel Mr. M.L. Bishnoi, representing the appellant-applicant, urges that the sampling procedure adopted by the Investigating Officer at the time of effect the seizure is contrary to the mandatory requirements of law. He further submits that the appellant is in custody for last nearly six years and two months and the hearing of the appeal is not likely in the near future. The accused-appellant does not have any criminal antecedents. The maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is of 10 years and as such, as per Mr. Bishnoi, the appellant deserves indulgence of bail during the pendency of appeal. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellants counsel. However, he too is not in a position to dispute the fact that from the sentence of 10 years awarded to the appellant, he has suffered the actual imprisonment of nearly six years and two months. 4. The appeal has not been listed for hearing till date. Considering the large number of cases being listed before the court, chances of early hearing of the appeal in near future are bleak. On perusal of the statement of the seizure officer, this court is duly satisfied that the appellant has arguable grounds to assail the procedure of sampling adopted by the Investigating Officer at the time of effecting recovery. In this background, I am satisfied that mandatory conditions of Section 32-A and 37 of the NDPS Act have satisfied and substantive sentence awarded to the accused appellant deserves to be suspended during pendency of this appeal, subject to the condition that the accused-appellant deposits half of the fine amount imposed upon him by the trial court. 5. In this background, I am satisfied that mandatory conditions of Section 32-A and 37 of the NDPS Act have satisfied and substantive sentence awarded to the accused appellant deserves to be suspended during pendency of this appeal, subject to the condition that the accused-appellant deposits half of the fine amount imposed upon him by the trial court. 5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence of imprisonment passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases No. 2, Chittorgarh vide judgment dated 30.05.2017 in Sessions Case No. 178/2014 (16/2013) against the appellant-applicant Mukesh Das S/o Shri Jagdish Das, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he deposits half of the fine amount, i.e. Rs. 1,00,000/-, in the trial court and further executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 20.02.2019 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address 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. 6. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant(s) was/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 purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said accused applicant(s) does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.