JUDGMENT :

VIJAY BISHNOI, J.

1. This suspension of sentence application has been preferred on behalf of the applicant-appellant against the judgment dated 30.09.2015 passed by the Special Judge NDPS Cases No. 1, Chittorgarh (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the trial court’) in Sessions Case No. 22/2010, whereby the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 8/15 and 8/18 of NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo 20 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has submitted that the applicant-appellant was on bail during the trial, however, he is in custody since 30.09.2015. It is also submitted that the applicant-appellant is in jail from last more than six years. It is further submitted that from the Seizure Memo and the statements of the Seizure officer (PW-33), it is clear that the samples of the narcotic contraband were not take out separately from each bag. It is, therefore, submitted that as per the law laid down by this Court in the case of Netram vs. State of Rajasthan, 2014 (1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163, the applicant-appellant can not be held guilty for possessing and transporting narcotic contraband above commercial quantity. It is, therefore, prayed that the sentence awarded by the trial court may kindly be suspended till pendency of the appeal as the same will take time.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer of the applicant-appellant for suspension of his sentence awarded by the trial court and produced the report dated 05.02.2022 of Superintendent of Central Jail, Udaipur, wherein it is mentioned that up to 05.02.2022, the applicant-appellant has served out sentence of 6 years 9 months and 11 days.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties on suspension of sentence application.

5. The argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant-appellant regarding the collection of samples in accordance with the established procedure, requires consideration.

6. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and custody period of the applicant-appellant and the fact that the appeal filed by the applicant-appellant may not be heard in near future, I consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the accused appellant.

7. Accordingly, this suspension of sentence application filed under Sec. 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court vide judgment dated 30.09.2015 in Sessions Case No. 22/2010 against applicant-appellant - Ratan Lal S/o Nandlal Ahir shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, 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 08.03.2022 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-appellant 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, 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-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused applicant-appellant 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.