HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Atul Sharma .....Appellant(s)

Versus State of U.P.

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) : Piyush Kumar Shukla, Subhash Chandra Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 91 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. Admit.

3. List in due course.

Order on Criminal Misc. Application under Section -

430(1) BNSS :-

1. This application has been filed on behalf of the appellant for suspension of sentence and grant of bail during pendency of this appeal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A.

for the State and perused the record.

3. The appellant has been convicted by the trial court under Section - 8/20 N.D.P.S. Act and he has been sentenced to four year rigorous imprisonment along with fine.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the Trial court has failed to appreciate the evidence in accordance with law and that there is no credible evidence against the appellant. Alleged recovery of 5 kg ganja shown from the possession of appellant, is wholly false. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. Learned counsel has referred impug