SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Pat) 490

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
P. B. BAJANTHRI and ALOK KUMAR PANDEY, JJ.
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.201 of 2021 in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.325 of 2020
(11.7.2024)
Suresh Das @ Suresh Das Tatwa ... Appellant
vs.
Union of India & Anr. ... Respondents

Advocates:
For the Appellant : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma.
For the Union of India : Mr. Anand Kumar Ojha.

Headnote:

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 389(1) & Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), 1985 – Section 37 – Suspension of sentence and release on bail – 4.5 kg. of charas – The principle is insofar as granting suspension of sentence or bail, it all depends on factual aspect of the concerned case – Ordinarily, the court does not interfere in respect of suspension of sentence and bail arising out of NDPS Act matter in the light of Section 37 of the Act – In the present case, as in evident from the list of documents, seized charas material has not been produced before the court and the same has not been marked – In fact taking not of the samples from 9 packets, they have collected two samples, quantity of 50 gms. of drug (charas) whereas samples have not been drawn from each of the 9 packet – When alleged charas substance was seized by the Inspector, seizure and recording of statements are not before the Gazetted Officer or the Judicial Magistrate – Further, there is no explanation on behalf of the respondents as to why there is delay of 11 months in getting inventory and certificate from the Judicial Magistrate – Present appeal is of the year 2021 for final disposal it may take years together due to pending of backlog case – Substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellant is suspended till the final disposal of the appeal – I.A. allowed. (Paras 8, 9 & 14)

Ravikant S. Patil Vs. Sarvabhouma S. Bagali, (2007) 1 SCC 673; Afjal Ansari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2024) 2 SCC 187 decided on 14.12.2023; Jitendra Vs. State of M.P., 2004 SCC (Cri) 2028; Mangilal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 862; Yusuf @ Asif Vs. State, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1328 – Relied.

State [NCT of Delhi] Narcotics Control Bureau Vs. Lokesh Chadha, (2021)5 SCC 724 (Paras-9, 10, 11); Preet Pal Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2020 (5) BLJ 355 (SC) : (2020) 8 SCC 645 (Para-35); Dadu alias Tulsidas Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2000) 8 SCC 437 (Para-27,28, 29); Ramesh Prasad Vs. State of Bihar, Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 231 of 2021 (Para-8 and 9); Mossa Koya KP Vs. State [NCT of Delhi], 2022 (1) BLJ 438 (SC) : 2021 SCC OnLine SC 3110 (Para-12); Tara Singh Vs. Union of India, 2016 (4) BLJ 43 (SC) : (2016) 11 SCC 335 (Para-13) – Distinguished.

P. B. Bajanthri, J.—

I.A. No.01 of 2023 arising out Criminal Appeal (DB) No.201 of 2021:

Brief facts of the case:

The present Interlocutory Application (I.A. No.01 of 2023) is filed by the appellant Suresh Das @ Suresh Das Tatwa under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence and his release on bail during the pendency of the Criminal Appeal (DB) No.201 of 2021 filed by him. He is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)C of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a term of Twelve Years and fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lac) and in default of payment of fine to undergo further Imprisonment for a period of Two Years.

2. Pursuant to the complaint dated 14.01.2018 at about 13:00 P.M, appellant was intercepted by S.S.B. Narkatiaganj at Pachrauta in District-West Champaran and recovered 4.50 kilogram of Charas. Based on this information, the Zonal Director, NCB, Patna, formed a team of NCB, Patna and, thereafter, the team departed from Patna to the place of occurrence. The Inspector of SSB Naresh Kumar narrated the occurrence. The seized substance was sealed with departmental seal and signatures of Seizing Officer, independent witnesses, the Inspector of SSB Naresh Kumar and Suresh Das @ Suresh Das Tatwa (appellant) were obtained on all the sealed packets. The Seizure List and Test Memo were prepared on the spot. Notice under Section 67 of the NDPS Act was served to the appellant and his statement was recorded so also the statements of two independent witnesses were recorded. The appellant along with the seized contraband and samples were produced before the District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS Act, West Champaran, Bettiah, on 15.01.2018. Seized contraband and duplicate samples were deposited in NCB Malkhana on 15.01.2018. The sample was stated to have been dispatched to C.R.C.L. Kolkata for its chemical examination. Thus, the appellant, who is alleged to have involved in trafficking Charas from Nepal to India, was subjected to trial. The trial concluded in sentencing him as under:—

“The accused/convict Suresh Das @ Suresh Das Tatwa is here by sentenced to undergo R.I. for a term of Twelve Years and fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lac) U/Sec.20(b)(ii) C of the NDPS Act and in default of payment of fine he shall further be sentenced to undergo Imprisonment for a period of Two Years.”

3. Appellant has questioned the validity of sentence in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.201 of 2021 under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. On 06.08.2021, it was admitted. State was asked to file written show cause reply to the application preferred under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. on behalf of appellant. On 26.10.2021, Co-ordinate Bench declined to grant bail on the score that 4.5 Kilogram Charas was recovered. In this backdrop, the appellant is in custody for the last about 6 years. In the month of June, 2023, I.A. No.01 of 2023 is filed. This is the 2nd application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C.

Appellant’s counsel submissions:

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has good case on merit in the Criminal Appeal (DB) No.201 of 2021 filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. and there are chances of his acquittal for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)C of the NDPS Act. It is submitted that various provisions of NDPS Act has not been followed by the competent authorities. It is submitted that the appellant was not subjected to search before the Gazetted Officer or a learned Jurisdictional Magistrate and it is in violation of Section 50 of the NDPS Act. Similarly, sub-section 5 of Section 50 of the NDPS Act has not been followed. The Investigating Officer was not examined. It is alleged that 9 packets containing altogether 4.5 kilogram of Charas was stated to have been recovered, two samples have not been drawn from each of the packets and it is in violation of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act. It is also submitted that no inventory was prepared, certification of the same, keeping the substance

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top