Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 2338 (DEL)

Christopher Chibuike v. State

2021-12-20

RAJNISH BHATNAGAR

body2021
JUDGMENT Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. - Crl.M.(Bail) 395/2020 (for suspension of sentence) 1. The present application is filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. read with section 482 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence of the appellant during the pendency of the present appeal. It is stated by the Ld. counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been convicted U/s 29/21(c) of NDPS Act and 14 of Foreigners Act and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months for the offence punishable under Section 29 of NDPS Act. He has also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years with fine of Rs. 50,000/- and in default of payment of fine, rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable U/s 14 of Foreigners Act. The appellant has also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, rigorous imprisonment for a period of four months for the offence punishable under Section 21(c) of NDPS Act. All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently as observed in order dated 03.11.2014 passed by Trial Court. 2. In case of Maktool Singh v. State of Punjab, 1999 (1) CC Cases 109 (SC), Dadu @ Tulsi Dass v. State of Maharashtra 2001 (1) C.C. Cases 91(SC) & Man Singh v. Union of India, 2006 (2) RCR (Crl.) 73(SC), the Division Bench held that:- "Where the convict is sentenced for ten years for having in his conscious possession commercial quantity of the contraband, he shall be entitled to bail if he has already undergone a total sentence of four years, which must included at least fifteen months after conviction" 3. In the present case, the appellant was arrested on 18.04.2013 and convicted on 30.10.2014 and as on date, he has completed more than 8 years, 7 months in prison from the date of his arrest. 4. The appellant/applicant has moved the present application for suspension of sentence during the pendency of appeal, however, keeping in view the dictum of the Honble Supreme Court in the aforesaid mentioned cases, the appellant/applicant is entitled for bail. 5. Keeping in view the above facts, I hereby suspend the sentence of the appellant till disposal of the appeal. 4. The appellant/applicant has moved the present application for suspension of sentence during the pendency of appeal, however, keeping in view the dictum of the Honble Supreme Court in the aforesaid mentioned cases, the appellant/applicant is entitled for bail. 5. Keeping in view the above facts, I hereby suspend the sentence of the appellant till disposal of the appeal. The appellant/applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. 6. The appellant/applicant shall furnish the address and mobile number to the IO and as and when he changes the residential address or mobile number, the same shall be submitted to the IO. The appellant/applicant shall visit the concerned Police Station on last Sunday of every month between 04:00 pm to 06:00 p.m. and mark his attendance. 7. The appellant/applicant shall not involve himself in any other case and in the event of any report against, this Court would consider the desirability of cancelling the suspension of sentence. The appellant shall also ensure his presence at the time of hearing of the appeal. The application is allowed and disposed of. 8. Copy of this order be transmitted to the Jail Superintendent and the Trial Court concerned for compliance. CRL.A. 760/2015 List in due course.