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
4 paragraphs · 293 wordsSat Pal, J.
This application has been filed under section 389(2) Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and fine during the pendency of the appeal. This application was being adjourned from time to time awaiting decision of the DB on the point as to whether prayer for suspension of sentence in an appeal under the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 is maintainable ? The Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 12th September, 1995 in Criminal Misc. No. 12027M of 1995 in Criminal Appeal No. 143SB of 1995 has now held that the such prayer is maintainable.
Mr. A.C. Jain, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been is custody for a period of more than seven months. He further submits that the alleged recovery from the petitioner is only 31/2 kilograms of poppy husk and provisions of section 30 of the Act were violated in this case inasmuch as the option to be searched before a Magistrate was not given to the petitioner. Keeping in view the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and particularly the fact that only 31/2 kgs of poppy husk has been recovered from the appellant, I am of the view that it is a fit case for suspension of sentence and fine. Accordingly, I direct that sentence awarded to the petitioner as well as the fine imposed upon him by the learned trial court shall remain suspended during the pendency of the appeal and the appellant/petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 25,000/ with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala.
With this order, the application stands disposed of.