Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 11986
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
SANDEEP SHAH, J
Ali Hasan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2260/2025 | S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 1635/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Om Singh Chauhan, Mr. J.K. Suthar
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Sameer Pareek, PP
Suspension of sentence is granted when the recovery is below commercial quantity and no previous criminal antecedents exist.
Headnote:The case concerns applications for suspension of sentence under the NDPS Act for appellants convicted for narcotic offenses. The court noted the recovery was below the commercial quantity and found there were no previous criminal antecedents, justifying the suspension of the sentences. The court identified the core issue as whether the sentences should be suspended considering the circumstances surrounding the case and the appellant's argument regarding the recovery process. The court allowed the applications for suspension of sentences.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments for suspension based on recovery amount and prior records. (Para 2) |
| 2. court's observation on the merits of suspension. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. final decision on suspension and bail conditions. (Para 5 , 6) |
Order
23/09/2025 S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2260/2025:-
1. Admit.
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1774/2025 & 1635/2025:-
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants-applicants as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants-applicants submit that the quantity of narcotic substance recovered was below commercial quantity and there are no criminal antecedents against them. They further submit that the appellants-applicants were on bail during the course of trial and considering the recovered quantity to be below commercial quantity the learned trial Court has imposed punishment of 4 years rigorous imprisonment against the appellants-applicants. They further submit that there is an arguable issue with regards to the recovery proceeding undertaken against appellants-applicants. They thus pray for allowing of applications for suspension of sentence.
3. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor opposes the applications for suspension of sentence and submits that the learned trial Court has considered each and every aspect of the matters and after considering the entire evidence threadbare and ensuring the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act, 1985 , the conviction order has been passed, and therefore, the appellants-
applicants are not entitled for any indulgence whatsoever.
4. Upon consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of both the sides and having perused the entire record, including the facts that the recovered substance is below commercial quantity, the appellants-applicants were on bail during the course of trial, there are certain arguable points raised by the appellants- applicants pertaining to recovery and mixing of the narcotic substance as well as the chances of hearing of appeals in near future being bleak, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused appellants-
applicants.
5. Accordingly, the applications for suspension of sentence filed under Section Section 430 of BNSS are allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases (Additional Sessions Judge) Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh vide judgment dated 20.08.2025 in Sessions (NDPS) Case No. 07/2025 (Old No.30/2017) against the applicants Ali Hasan S/o Shah Hasan and Gurjeet Singh S/o Mukhtyar Singh shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeals and they shall be released on bail, provided each of them execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/-, each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance in this Court on 28.10.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeals on the conditions indicated below:-
1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.
6. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant(s) was/were 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 applicant(s) does/do not appear before
