HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J.
Dinesh S/o Jagdish Vaishnav – Appellant
Versus
N.C.B., Jodhpur – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 619 of 2020
Decided On : 17-01-2022
Suspension of Sentence - NDPS Act - The court allowed the suspension of the substantive sentence awarded to the accused appellant, considering that he had already undergone more than 7 years of a 10-year sentence under the NDPS Act, pending the final disposal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 8/29 of the NDPS act and sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine. The appellant had already undergone more than 7 years of the sentence.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the suspension of the substantive sentence, considering the time already served by the appellant and the pending appeal.
Issues: The main issue was the application for suspension of sentence under Sec.389 Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the time already served by the appellant and the pending appeal as just and proper reasons to suspend the substantive sentence.
Final Decision: S.B. Suspension of Sentence (appeal) No.619/2020 filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed, and the substantive sentence passed by the trial court against the appellant shall remain suspended till the final disposal of the appeal, provided certain conditions are met.
JUDGMENT
Vijay Bishnoi, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties on S.B. Suspension of Sentence (appeal) No.619/2020.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant was convicted by 1the trial court for the offence punishable under Section 8/29 of the NDPS act and sentenced for 10 years of rigorous imprisonment along with fine. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that out of 10 years of sentence, the appellant has already undergone more than 7 years. It is also submitted that final hearing of the appeal will take time.
3. Learned Special Public Prosecutor Mr. M.R. Pareek opposed the application for suspension of sentence.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the appellant has already undergone more than 7 years of sentence out of total sentence of 10 years, I consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the accused appellant.
5. accordingly, S.B. Suspension of Sentence (appeal) No.619/2020 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 4.5.2019 in Sessions Case No.2/2015 against appellant Dinesh S/o Jagdish Vaishnav 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 21.02.2022 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 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.
7. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-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-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 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 established that a lack of evidence of knowledge regarding contraband transport can justify the suspension of a sentence under the NDPS Act.
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.
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.