Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ratnesh Pandey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 July, 2024
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
1 CRA-1793-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 1793 of 2024
(RATNESH PANDEY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH )
Dated : 29-07-2024
Shri Ankit Saxena - Advocate for appellant.
Shri A.S. Baghel - Public Prosecutor for resspondent/State.
Heard on I.A.No.3060 of 2024 - an application for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail on behalf of the appellant Ratnesh Pandey.
This criminal appeal assails the judgment dated 21.12.2023 passed by the Special Judge NDPS, Rewa in Case No.15 of 2017 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 8(C) read with Section 21(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.1,00,000/- with default stipulations.
It is submitted that there are contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. The appellant was on bail during trial and has never misused the liberty granted to him. He is under custody since date of judgment i.e. 21.12.2023. This application has been filed mainly on two grounds; firstly that codeine phosphate cannot be considered as a contraband under the N.D.P.S. Act itself. In this regard he has relied upon the judgments in the cases of Arvind Chandwani vs. State of M.P. decided on 28.04.2016 (M.Cr.C.No.19922 of 2015) a n d Anita Gupta vs. Central Narcotics Bureau, Gwalior dated 24.04.2023 (M.Cr.C.No.9824 of 2023) and secondly that there is total non-compliance of the Section 52-A of the Act. By pointing out discrepancies in the statement of Khuman Singh (PW/5), it is argued that total bottles which have been seized were not even deposited in the malkhana; deposit articles were not kept properly; when Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 7/29/2024 7:05:28 PM 2 CRA-1793-2024 they were produced before the court, several wear and tear bottles were left;. affixing of the seal on the seized articles was not properly done. There is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in near future. The appellants are ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court while considering his application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the State has opposed the contentions relying upon the judgment and evidence recorded before the trial court. It is submitted that huge recovery has been made from the possession of the appellant, but he could not dispute the fact that there are discrepancies in the statement of Khuman Singh (PW/5).
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Accordingly, I.A.No.3060 of 2024 is allowed and it is directed that the jail sentence of the appellant shall remain under suspension subject to the verification that the amount of fine has been deposited, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 25.11.2024 and thereafter on such other dates as may directed by the Registry of this Court in this regard.
List the matter for final hearing in due course.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 7/29/2024 7:05:28 PM 3 CRA-1793-2024 sj Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 7/29/2024 7:05:28 PM