RAJESH BHALLA Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed by the appellant under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. praying inter alia for suspension of sentence during the pendency of the accompanying appeal. By the impugned judgment dated 17.03.2010, the appellant was found guilty and convicted of the offence under Section 27-A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act ) by the learned Special Judge, NDPS. As per the order on sentence dated 20.03.2010, the appellant was awarded a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and a fine of '1,00,000/-. In default of payment of fine, it was directed that the appellant would undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 24.08.2001, based on secret information received by the Special Cell, Lodhi Colony, a raiding party was formed and at 10.20 pm at night, two persons were apprehended from near the Ambassador Hotel. One Naquibullah, was apprehended by the police, while supplying 1 gm of cocaine to one Neeraj Wadhera. In the disclosure statement of Naquibullah as recorded on 30.8.2001, he disclosed that he used to receive financial assistance from the appellant. Pursuant to this disclosure statement, recovery was made of two =self cheques amounting to '20,000/- each, issued by the appellant and allegedly encashed by Naquibullah. The appellant surrendered on 20.2.2002 and pursuant to the disclosure statement made by him, recovery was made of two more =self cheques of '10,000/- and '5,000/-, issued by the appellant and allegedly encashed by Naquibullah.

(3.) At the outset, the learned APP for the State challenged the maintainability of the application for the suspension of sentence in the light of Section 32-A of the Act, which prohibits suspension of any sentence awarded under the Act, except under Section 27 of the Act. He also opposed the grant of suspension of sentence on merits, on the ground that there is no infirmity in the order of conviction passed by the Special Judge, NDPS, as there exists sufficient evidence on record to show that the appellant was involved in financing of the drug trade.