Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Balvindra Singh @ Paras vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:21305) on 2 May, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:21305]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 688/2025
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.264/2025
Balvindra Singh @ Paras S/o Shri Harbansh Singh Raiskh, Aged
About 37 Years, R/o 4B Badi Pakki, Police Station Hindumalkot,
Dist. Sriganganagar (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Sri
Ganganagar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Matoria
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
02/05/2025
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been
moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated
10.01.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Act Cases,
Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No.57/2017 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 06/05/2025 at 09:35:04 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:21305] (2 of 4) [SOSA-688/2025]
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. The appellant is convicted for having in possession of
medicinal drug which was found in his hand and fully touched with
his body. To effect search of a person, a prior notice under Section
50 of NDPS Act has to be given which is admittedly not given in
this case. The ratio decided in the case of Boota Singh & Ors.
Vs. State of Haryana reported in AIR 2021 SC 1913 and in the
case of State of Punjab Vs. Balbir Singh reported in AIR 2005
SC 27 apply here mutatis mutandis. In this case, the total non
compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act vitiates the entire recovery
and conviction cannot be sustained. This is not the final opinion of
this Court but only it is an observance for just decision of
application for suspension of sentence. The appeal had been
admitted for making further appreciation and it is made clear that
the applicability of the provision above would remain subject
matter of appeal.
6. In view of the above as well as taken into account the period
of custody already undergone by the applicant-appellant, his
previous conduct and the possibility of delay in hearing of the
(Downloaded on 06/05/2025 at 09:35:04 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:21305] (3 of 4) [SOSA-688/2025]
appeal and further taking into account that the embargo contained
under Section 32 and 37 of NDPS Act is not attracted in this case,
this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the
sentence awarded to the accused-appellant.
7. 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
sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
Judge for his appearance in this court on 02.06.2025 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.
8. 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
(Downloaded on 06/05/2025 at 09:35:04 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:21305] (4 of 4) [SOSA-688/2025]
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
73-divya/-
(Downloaded on 06/05/2025 at 09:35:04 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_1]
Source link