Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anand Vibhore Rajput vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 August, 2020
Author: Sujoy Paul
Bench: Sujoy Paul
1 CRA-4858-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA-4858-2019
(ANAND VIBHORE RAJPUT Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
12
Jabalpur, Dated : 13-08-2020
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Alok Vaghrecha, counsel for the appellant.
Shri Akshay Pawar, P.L for respondent/State.
Heard on admission.
The appeal contains arguable points and is accordingly admitted for final hearing.
Also heard on I.A.No.10749/2019. This is first bail application on behalf of the appellant under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant.
The appellant is convicted under section 8 read with Section 20(B) (2B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for for seven years with fine of Rs.50000/- with default stipulation.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per prosecution story, 758 grams of "Charas" is recovered from this appellant. As per entry 23 of the relevant schedule it is a "medium quantity". The appellant has no previous criminal record. Arising out of this crime number he remained in jail for about 23 months. By taking this court to the notice prepared under Section 50 of the NDPS Act (Ex.P/4), it is urged that if this document is examined in juxtaposition to another memo by which some money is recovered from the appellant, it will be clear that money is recovered prior in time and while preparing said memo in relation to recovery of money from the trouser of the appellant, no mention is made about recovery of objectionable substance "Charas". It is an after thought and Ex.P/4, the notice under section 50 of the Act was subsequently prepared. It creates serious doubt Signature Not Verified SAN about preparation of the notice Ex.P/4. The action runs contrary to the law Digitally signed by MANOJ KUMAR LALWANI Date: 2020.08.13 17:13:16 IST 2 CRA-4858-2019 laid down by the Apex Court in the case reported in 2018(18) SCC 380 (Arif Khan Vs. State of Uttarakhand). It is urged that the trouser from which the substance is allegedly recovered was not seized at all. The independent seizure witnesses had turned hostile. In the similar backdrop this court in Cr.A.No.8727/18, on 09.06.2020 granted bail wherein the quantity of objectionable substance was 01 Kg. Similarly, in Cr.A.No.8336/18, the co-
ordinate bench granted bail on 03.10.2019 wherein the quantity was 750 grams. The Appellant is a young boy and final hearing of this appeal is not possible in near future. Considering the aforesaid, the jail sentence of the appellant may be suspended.
Prayer is opposed by the other side on the strength of certain paragraphs of the judgment.
I have heard the parties and perused the record. Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, the quantity of substance recovered, the orders passed by the co0ordinate bench in aforesaid criminal appeals coupled with the fact that hearing of this appeal will take time, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it proper to suspend the remaining jail sentence of the appellant.
I.A is allowed.
It is directed that appellant Anand Vibhore Rajput be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand) alongwith one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before the trial court, Bhopal on 22.12.2020 and on such further dates as are given to him by that court till final hearing of this appeal or until otherwise directed by this court in that behalf.
C.C as per rules.
(SUJOY PAUL) JUDGE Signature Not Verified SAN MKL Digitally signed by MANOJ KUMAR LALWANI Date: 2020.08.13 17:13:16 IST 3 CRA-4858-2019 Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MANOJ KUMAR LALWANI Date: 2020.08.13 17:13:16 IST