HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Vijay Bishnoi, J.
Surendra Pal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 350 of 2021
Decided On : 05-05-2022
Suspension of Sentence - NDPS Act - The court allowed the suspension of the substantive sentence awarded to the accused under the NDPS Act, considering the custody period and the anticipated delay in hearing the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant-appellant was convicted for offences under the NDPS Act and sentenced to 15 years of rigorous imprisonment. He had already served 8 years and 8 months of the sentence. The appeal hearing was not expected to happen soon.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the totality of facts and circumstances, including the custody period and the anticipated delay in the appeal hearing, and decided to suspend the substantive sentence.
Issues: Suspension of sentence application under Sec.389 Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the custody period and the anticipated delay in the appeal hearing as justifying the suspension of the substantive sentence under the NDPS Act.
Final Decision: The suspension of sentence application was allowed, and the substantive sentence was ordered to remain suspended till the final disposal of the appeal, subject to certain conditions.
JUDGMENT
Vijay Bishnoi, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties on suspension of sentence application.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has submitted that the applicant-appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under NDPS act and sentenced for 15 year of rigorous imprisonment vide impugned judgment. It is submitted that out of total sentence, the applicant-appellant has already undergone 8 yeas and 8 months of sentence. It is also submitted that there is no possibility of hearing of the appeal in near future.
3. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, taking into consideration the custody period of the accused applicant-appellant and in view of the fact that the hearing of the appeal will take time, I consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the accused applicant-appellant.
4. 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 04.03.2017 in Sessions Case No.291/2014 (85/2013) against applicant-appellant - Surendra Pal Singh S/o Shri Bachan Singh 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 06.06.2022 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.
5. 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.
The court has the discretion to suspend the substantive sentence under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of facts and circumstances, including the custody period and the anticipated delay in the ....
The court has the discretion to suspend the substantive sentence under Sec. 389 Cr.P.C. considering the totality of facts and circumstances, including the custody period and the anticipated delay in ....
The court has the discretion to suspend the substantive sentence if it deems it just and proper, considering the circumstances of the case and the pending appeal.
The court has the discretion to suspend substantive sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C. based on the arguments and facts of the case.
The court may suspend a sentence if the accused are on bail and the appeal process is expected to take a significant amount of time.
The court ruled that the duration of custody and the nature of injuries justified the suspension of the appellant's sentence pending appeal.
The court has the discretion to suspend the substantive sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. until the final disposal of the appeal, based on the circumstances of the case.
The court may suspend a substantive sentence and grant bail if there is no imminent hearing for the revision application, ensuring fair treatment of the accused.
The court may suspend a sentence pending appeal if justified by circumstances, requiring compliance with specific bail conditions.
Suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is warranted when appellants were on bail during trial and appeal hearing is not imminent.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.