IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE) NO.

1 of 2026 In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 334 of 2026 ==========================================================

JAYESH @ JAY BHANABHAI MAKWANA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR PRATIK B BAROT(3711) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MS. C.M SHAH, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Date : 24/03/2026

IA ORDER

1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appears and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. By way of the present application under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant - accused is seeking suspension of sentence and release on regular bail during pendency of the present appeal against the judgment and order of conviction dated 16.10.2025 passed in Special NDPS Case No. 81/2024 by the learned Special Judge (NDPS Court) & 11^th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat, whereby, the present applicant - accused was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of ten years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default, rigorous imprisonment of one year for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of NDPS Act.

3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Pratik Barot for the applicant and learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the respondent State.

4. Learned Advocate Mr. Pratik Barot for the applicant submits that the execution of order of sentence of the co- accused from whom the contraband was found has been suspended and has been released on bail by an order dated 20.01.2026 and the allegations against the applicant is that the applicant had brought the contraband from the co- accused from Mumbai Central and had kept 20 to 25 grams of MD Drugs with him and had given the remaining amount to the co-accused. As far as the evidence produced by the prosecution qua the applicant is that some online money transactions were between the applicant and the other co- accused but if the evidence is perused, during the investigation, it was revealed that the applicant and other co-accused had business dealing in mobile phones but the Investigating Officer has not investigated anything about this aspect. There is no iota of evidence that the applicant is involved in this offence in any manner and there is patent infirmity in the order of conviction. The learned Trial Court has read into the statement of the co-accused and there is no independent material to prove that the conspiracy was hatched at a particular place in a particular fashion and the criminal conspiracy is not proved. Learned advocate further submits that the applicant in his further statement had also stated that he and the other co-accused were dealing in selling and purchase of old mobile phones but the inter say has been given a complete goby and even though there are no independent material intersay amongst the applicant and other co-accused, the applicant has been convicted entirely on a weak piece of circumstance. Learned advocate further submits that the applicant has a fair chance of acquittal at the final hearing. Moreover, learned advocate for the applicant submits that the sentence is for a fixed period and hence, the execution of order of sentence imposed on 16.10.2025 passed in Special NDPS Case No. 81/2024 by the learned Special Judge (NDPS Court) & 11^th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat be suspended in the matter. Learned advocate further submits that the present appeal is not likely to be heard in near future and hearing of the same would take some long time and hence, no purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period with hardened criminals. The applicant has a good case on merits and hence, the application may be allowed and the applicant be enlarged on bail pending hearing and final disposal of the captioned Criminal Appeal.

5. Learned APP Ms. C