JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP MEHTA, J.

1. This second application for suspension of sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-applicant Angrej Singh who has been convicted and sentenced for the offences under Sections 8/21, 25 & 29 of the NPDS Act vide the judgment dated 17.07.2019 passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No. 52/2016. He is in custody since 08.10.2016.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant-application, learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

3. The first application for SOS submitted on behalf of the appellant was dismissed on 12.12.2019 Now, this second application for SOS has been moved by counsel Shri Bishnoi. It is submitted that the appellant has undergone more than five and half years of actual imprisonment and thus, more than half of the sentences has been served out. Shri Vishnoi places reliance on this Court's order dated 14.01.2022 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 441/2021 (Manish v. State of Rajasthan) whereby the sentences awarded to the said accused was suspended and on the orders passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Saudan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4633/2021 decided on 05.10.2021) and Manohar Lal Ainani v. State of Rajasthan and Anr. (Petition for Special leave to Appeal (Cri) No. 2893/2021 decided on 15.11.2021). Shri Bishnoi thus, urges that the petitioner deserves indulgence of bail during pendency of appeal.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel. However, he too does not dispute the fact that the appellant has remained in custody in this case for 5 years and 4 months. He does not have any criminal antecedents. There is no possibility of early disposal of the appeal.

5. In the case of Manohar Lal (supra), the custodial period of six and a half years was considered sufficient to grant bail to the said accused. There are bleak chances of early disposal of the appeal. As a consequence, I am of the firm opinion that conditions of Section 32-A read with Section 37 of the NDPS Act are duly satisfied.

6. In this background and having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to enlarge the appellant-applicant on bail by suspending his sentences during the pendency of the appeal.

7. Accordingly, the instant second application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Sriganganagar, vide judgment dated 17.07.2019 in Sessions Case No. 52/2016 against the appellant-applicant Angrej Singh S/o Sh. Darshan Singh shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to the condition that he shall furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 02.03.2022 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their 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(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant(s) was/were tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Crimin