Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 751 (RAJ)

Sonu Tailor v. Union Of India, Through C. B. N.

2019-03-06

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material on record. 2. The appellant applicant herein stands convicted for the offence under Section 8/21(C) of the NDPS Act vide judgment dated 04.02.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Cases, Pratapgarh in Sessions Case No. 24/2014. 3. The accused has suffered incarceration of nearly 5 years. Learned counsel Shri Vishnoi points out that if proceedings undertaken by the Court under Section 52A of the NDPS Act are considered, manifestly, the weight of the total recovered contraband would be less than commercial quantity and hence, the appellant has strong case so as to challenge his conviction as recorded by the trial court for possession of smack weighing more than 250 gms. (commercial quantity). He urges that the appellant does not have any criminal antecedents. He further submits that till date, the appeal has not been taken up for hearing even once. He thus urges that the sentences awarded to the appellant deserve to be suspended, 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellants counsel. However, he too does not dispute the fact that the appeal has not been taken up for hearing till date. It is also not in dispute that there exists discrepancy in the weight of the recovered article when the comparison is made of the seizure memo prepared by the department and the proceedings undertaken by the Court under Section 52A of the NDPS Act. 5. In this background, and having regard to the facts and circumstances available on the record; the prolonged custodial period suffered by the appellant and the bleak chances of early disposal of the appeal, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentences awarded to the applicant appellant. 6. Accordingly, the third application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Cases, Pratapgarh, vide judgment dated 04.02.2017 in Sessions Case No. 24/2014 against the appellant-applicant Sonu Tailor, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he deposits 50% of the fine amount with the trial court and executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 9.04.2019 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. 7. 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.