Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR, JJ
Ramchandra Yadav, Son Of Late Kuleshwar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
IA No.13455 of 2024
This instant interlocutory application has been filed for suspension of sentence against the Judgment of conviction dated 24.05.2024 and order of sentence dated 03.06.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS Act, Chatra, in connection with NDPS Case No.98 of 2022, arising out of Kunda P.S. Case No.21 of 2021, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under Section 18 of the NDPS Act and directed to undergo R.I. for 14 years and also directed to pay a fine of Rs.1,50,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further directed to undergo R.I. for one and half year and the period of detention undergone be set off.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that it is a case where the identically co-accused person has already been directed to be released on bail by passing order of suspension of sentence as it would evident from the annexure-1 appended with the interlocutory application wherein one co-convict, namely, Mr. Bechu Yadav, the appellant in Cr. A. (DB) No. 1099 of 2024 has been directed to be released on bail vide order dated 02.12.2024 from whose possession, the quantity of contraband (afim)
Doubts in the prosecution's case regarding the seizure of contraband justified the suspension of the appellant's sentence.
The location of contraband recovery outside a residence creates grounds for suspension of sentence under the N.D.P.S. Act when it raises questions about culpability.
The court upheld the conviction under the NDPS Act, emphasizing compliance with statutory provisions and the sufficiency of evidence linking the appellant to the crime.
Point of Law : Statement under Section 67 cannot be relied upon but herein, Court are not considering to rely upon statement under Section 67 of NDPS Act, thus judgment is also not applicable in this....
Compliance with statutory procedures during search and seizure is essential for maintaining the integrity of evidence in drug-related offenses.
Compliance with Section 52-A of the NDPS Act is essential for the validity of seizure and evidence, impacting the court's decision on bail and sentence suspension.
Non-compliance with Section 52A of the NDPS Act in evidence collection can lead to suspension of sentence, especially when prolonged custody and delays in appeal hearings are present.
In criminal proceedings, inconsistencies in witness testimonies can create reasonable doubt, warranting bail during the appeal process.
Suspension of sentence based on insufficient prosecution evidence and duration already served.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
