Arjun Ram @ Pappu vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:20054) on 24 April, 2025

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Arjun Ram @ Pappu vs Union Of India (2025:Rj-Jd:20054) on 24 April, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2025:RJ-JD:20054]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
 S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
                                 No. 1577/2024

                                           In

                     S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1847/2024

Arjun Ram @ Pappu S/o Shri Baksa Ram Bishnoi, Aged About 35
Years, Village Manewada Post Champasar Tehsil Bap Distt.
Jodhpur. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Sri Ganganagar)
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
Union Of India, Through Ncb
                                                                    ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. KC Bishnoi
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. MR Pareek, Spl. PP, NCB



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

24/04/2025

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated

09.10.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases,

Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.29/2021 whereby he was

convicted and sentenced to suffer twenty years’ RI along with a

fine of Rs.1,00,000/- under Section 8/22 of NDPS Act.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that

the learned trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and

factual aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous

conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be

appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court. The

(Downloaded on 01/05/2025 at 09:21:13 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:20054] (2 of 3) [SOSA-1577/2024]

appellant was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty so

granted to him; hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time,

therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be

granted.

3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-

applicant for releasing the appellant on application for suspension

of sentence.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. Perusal of the record revealing that the appellant has served

four years of sentence out of total ten years. The plea of non-

compliance of mandatory provision, specially Sections 42, 50, 52A

and 55 of NDPS Act cannot be ignored and for this purpose, the

entire material is required to be re-visited and re-appreciated. The

samples were taken from a single strip and thus, a plea has been

raised that it cannot be said with utmost certainty that every strip

of each packet was containing psychotropic substance.

Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of case, this

court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the

sentence awarded to the accused-appellant.

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentence passed by learned trial court, the details of which are

provided in the first para of this order, against the appellant-

applicant named above shall remain suspended till final disposal of

the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail provided he

executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-with two

(Downloaded on 01/05/2025 at 09:21:13 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:20054] (3 of 3) [SOSA-1577/2024]

sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial

Judge for his appearance in this court on 26.05.2025 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.

7. 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.

(FARJAND ALI),J
66-divya/-

(Downloaded on 01/05/2025 at 09:21:13 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)