Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Mahendra Rajak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 December, 2024

                                                               1                               CRA-9192-2024
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                      CRA No. 9192 of 2024

(MAHENDRA RAJAK Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH ) Dated : 23-12-2024 Shri Dwarika Singh Chouhan - Advocate for the appellant.

Shri Vijay - Government Advocate for the State.

Appellant has filed IA No.23635/2024 for condonation of delay of one day in filing of appeal.

2. For the reasons so stated in the application, IA No.23635/2024 for condonation of delay, is allowed.

3. Appellant has also filed IA No.24827/2024 an application under Section 430 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail.

4. Appellant has been convicted under Section 8/20(B)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo for R.I. for two years with fine of Rs.25,000/- with default stipulation.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that seizure witnesses i.e. Raja @ Raja Mohammed (PW-1) and Vijay Raikwar (PW-5) have not supported the prosecution story. Mandatory provisions of NDPS Act have not been complied with. There are serious omission and contradiction in the statements of witnesses. There is no previous criminal antecedents of the appellant. Appellant is in custody. Appellant is convicted for a period of two years. Hearing of appeal is likely to take some more time. Considering aforesaid, appellant may be released on bail and his jail sentence Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 24-12-2024 11:13:19 AM 2 CRA-9192-2024 may be suspended.

6. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the State opposed the application for suspension of sentence.

7. Heard the counsel for the parties.

8. There is no previous antecedents of appellant. Hearing of appeal is likely to take some time. Witnesses have not supported the prosecution story.

9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I.A. No.24827/2024 for suspension of sentence is allowed.

10. It is hereby directed that the custodial sentence awarded to the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to depositing the fine amount, if not already deposited and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.

Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety bond of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his appearance before the Registry of this Court on 10.03.2025 and on other dates as may be fixed in this regard till final disposal of this appeal.

Certified copy as per rules.

(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL) V. JUDGE $A Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 24-12-2024 11:13:19 AM