HARNAM SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This present applications for suspension of sentences under Sec. 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the appellant- applicants Gurnam Singh & Harnam Singh who have been convicted and sentenced vide judgment dtd. 8/7/2019 passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases (Additional Sessions Judge), Bhadra, Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.13/17(35/08) for the offences under Ss. 8/15 of the NDPS Act qua accused-appellant Gurnaam Singh and Ss. 8/15 & 25 of NDPS Act qua accused-appellant Harnam Singh.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicants, learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

(3.) Arguing on the application for suspension of sentences, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants-appellants that as per the facts mentioned at para No.2 of the impugned judgment, samples were collected mixing all the alleged contraband after being unloaded in one palald (cloth), hence, it is clear violation of the guidelines issued by this Court rendered in the case of Netram v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2014(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 163. Learned counsel further stated that provision of sub-clause 3 of Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act has not been complied with by the seizure officer and necessary language of sub clause 3 of Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act has not reproduced in the said notice (Exh.- P/6) given under Sec. 50 of the NDPS Act. Learned counsel further stated that applicant-appellant Harnam Singh is behind the bars for more than seven years and applicant-appellant Gurnaam Singh is behind the bars for more than five years. Lastly, learned counsel has submitted that final decision of the appeal is likely to take considerable time, and, therefore, it would be appropriate to keep applicants-appellants under further incarceration.