The court affirmed that the gravity of charges related to national security justifies the denial of sentence suspension, regardless of the duration of custody.

ORDER

Vijay Bishnoi, J. - D.B. Criminal Appeal Nos.143/2020 and 147/2020 are admitted. No need to issue notice of the said appeals as the parties are already represented through their respective counsel.

2. These suspension of sentence applications have been preferred on behalf of applicants for suspending their sentence awarded by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Barmer (hereinafter to be referred as 'the trial court') vide judgment dated 25.08.2020 in Sessions Case No.01/2010 (37/2010, 04/2016) while convicting and sentencing them for life imprisonment for the offences punishable under Sections 5 and 6/9-B of Explosive Act; Sections 4, 5 and 6 of Explosive Substances Act; Sections 3/25 and 7/25(1)(D)(1-AA) of Arms Act; Sections 3/10, 13, 18 and 20 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and Sections 153-A and 120-B IPC.

Regarding Nazir S/o Meeru Khan :-

3. Mr. Nishant Bora, learned counsel appearing for applicant-Nazir S/o Meeru Khan has submitted that the applicant is in custody from last more than 12 years and taking into consideration this fact alone, his sentence may be suspended.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Smt. Akhtari Bi Vs. State of M.P. [Appeal (Crl.) 320/2001] dated 22.03.2001 and the order passed in Saudan Singh Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh [Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4633/2021] dated 05.10.2021 and argued that as the applicant is in jail from around 12 years and the appeal filed by him will take time in decision, his sentence may be suspended.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of applicant-Nazir S/o Meeru Khan and argued that the present case is involving sovereignty and integrity of the country. It is submitted that the applicant along with other co-accused persons hatched the conspiracy and received illegal firearms and explosive RDX from Pakistani smugglers over the border with the understanding that they would supply the said illegal arms and explosives to the members of terrorist organization Babbar Khalsa of Punjab to carry out terrorist activities.

6. It is further submitted that the trial court has meticulously examined the prosecution evidence and given a finding that the applicant, along with other co-accused - Soda Khan @ Sobar @ Luniya had received the haul of illegal arms including explosive RDX from the Pakistani smugglers and hidden the same on a secluded place with the intention to supply the same to the members of the terrorist organization Babbar Khalsa of Punjab. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that with the alertness of the police, the haul of illegal arms and the explosive RDX were recovered before it could be supplied to the terrorist. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the offences, for which applicant-Nazir S/o Meeru Khan has been convicted and sentenced, are serious and heinous in nature, therefore, the sentence awarded to him may not be suspended.

Regarding Nazir Khan S/o Jiya Khan :-

7. Mr. Suresh Kumbhat, learned counsel appearing for applicant-Nazir Khan S/o Jiya Khan has submitted that the applicant is in custody from last more than 5 years and he was enlarged on bail during trial. It is further argued that as per the prosecution story, the applicant was in receipt of the illegal arms and explosives, said to have been smuggled by the smugglers of Pakistan. It is submitted that the allegation of transporting illegal arms and explosives in the vehicle of the applicant is also false and not supported by any evidence. It is, therefore, argued that it is a case of 'no evidence' and in such circumstances, the sentence awarded to the applicant is liable to be suspended.

8. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of applicant-Nazir Khan S/o Jiya Khan and argued that the prosecution has sufficiently proved the charges against