Chidiebere Kingsley Nawchara vs Narcotics Control Bureau on 26 April, 2022

[Cites 5, Cited by 1]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Chidiebere Kingsley Nawchara vs Narcotics Control Bureau on 26 April, 2022

Bench: Jasmeet Singh

                          $~135
                          *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +     CRL.A. 350/2020
                                CHIDIEBERE KINGSLEY NAWCHARA               ..... Appellant
                                     Through: Mr Adarsh Priyadarshi and Ms Shweta Saini,
                                                Advs.
                                     versus
                                NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU                  ..... Respondent
                                    Through: Mr Subhash Bansal, Senior Standing Counsel for
                                             NCB with Mr Shashwat Bansal, Adv.
                                CORAM:
                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH
                                             ORDER

% 26.04.2022 CRL.M.A. 7708/2022 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.A. 7707/2022

This is an application seeking early listing and hearing of application for suspension of sentence/bail application being CRL. M.B 7630/2020.

It is submitted by Mr Priyadarshi that the applicant has been in J/C since 01.10.2013 and vide order dated 09.01.2020 the trial Court sentenced the applicant to undergo RI for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh under Sections 22(c) and 23 (c) NDPS Act. Out of the total sentence of 10 years the applicant has already undergone incarceration for a period of more than 8. The petitioner has relied on observations of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in CRL.A. 1562/2021 arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 8647/2021 titled „Mossa Koya KP v. State (NCT of Delhi)‟ particularly para 12 and 13 which Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMIT ARORA Signing Date:28.04.2022 15:46:28 reads as under:

"12 We appreciate the submission of the Additional Solicitor General that offences under the NDPS Act are of a serious nature and the case is at the post conviction stage. Yet the Court cannot be unmindful of the fact that the appellant has undergone 8 years out of the total sentence of 10 years. The appeal is unlikely to be heard early. In all probability, the entire sentence would have been undergone by the time the appeal is heard. The decisions on the basis of which the High Court of Delhi has declined to grant suspension of sentence, are, at the highest, a broad guideline and cannot be placed on the same pedestal as a statutory interdict. With the pendency of the work in the High Court, it may not be feasible to expedite the disposal of the appeal within a short period. 13 In the circumstances, particularly, since the appellant has undergone 8 years out of ten years of the total sentence which has been imposed on him, we are of the view that a fit and proper case has been made out for the suspension of the sentence under Section 389 CrPC."

Issue notice.

Mr Shashwat Bansal, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent. He seeks and is granted one week to file response, if any.

List on 12.05.2022.

JASMEET SINGH, J APRIL 26, 2022/sr Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMIT ARORA Signing Date:28.04.2022 15:46:28

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders