High CourtsSingle Bench

Jethmal vs State

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 1 February 2022 · Citation: (2022) 02 RAJ CK 0016

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vinod Kumar Bharwani, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 389 · Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 8, 15(C), 32A, 37
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 311 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

34 paragraphs · 681 words

Vinod Kumar Bharwani, J

The instant application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-applicant Jethmal S/o Dami

Chand, who has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 8/15 (C) of the NDPS Act vide the judgment dated 20.08.2019 passed

by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Pali in Sessions Case No.140/2016 (01/2020).

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

As per the prosecution case, the appellant was apprehended with 14 gunny bags containing contraband poppy straw weighing 290 Kgs when the

search was conducted by the SHO PS Sadar, District Pali. Learned counsel submits that no other case under the NDPS Act has been registered

against the accused-appellant. He further submits that the appellant has served actual sentence of five years six months whereafter this application for

SOS has been moved.

Learned Public Prosecutor was instructed to place on record the antecedent report of the appellant. As per the report received from the SHO Police

Station Sadar, District Pali no case other than the present one has been registered against the appellant. The appellant has remained in custody for

more than five years. Hon’ble the Supreme Court considered the concept of grant of bail on account of prolonged custody in the case of Saudan

Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh (Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4633/2021 decided on 05.10.2021) and Manohar Lal Ainani vs State

of Rajasthan and Anr (Petition for Special leave to Appeal (Cri) No.2893/2021 decided on 15.11.2021).

In the case of Manohar Lal (supra), 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 sentences awarded to

him by the trial court. As a consequence, I am of the firm opinion that conditions of Section 32-A read with Section 37 of the NDPS Act are duly

satisfied.

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

appellant-applicant on bail by suspending his sentences during the pendency of the appeal.

Accordingly, the instant second application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences

passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pali, vide judgment dated 20.09.2019 in Sessions Case No.140/2016 (01/2010) against the appellant-applicant

Jethmal S.o Dami Chand 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 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 in this court on 02.03.2022 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1.

That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2.

That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his 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.

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case

related to original case in which the accused-applicant was 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 does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of

bail.