SURENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-applicant has preferred this third application under Section 389 Cr.P.C., 1973 seeking suspension of sentence awarded by Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Bhilwara (for short, 'learned trial Court') by its judgment dated 23rd of December, 2015. The learned trial Court by the impugned order has indicted appellant applicant for offence under 8/15 of the NDPS and 482 IPC and handed down sentence of rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to undergo sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) The first application of appellant-applicant was dismissed on 20.04.2016 followed by dismissal of second application on 17.02.2018. While dismissing the second application for suspension of sentence, liberty was granted to the appellant applicant to renew his prayer afresh after three months.

(3.) Arguing on this third application for suspension of sentence, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant-applicant that out of total maximum sentence of ten years' rigorous imprisonment, appellant-applicant has already remained in custody for more than four years and five months. Learned counsel has further argued that considering the prolonged custody of the appellant, his sentence is liable to be suspended. In support thereof, learned counsel has placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in case of Thana Singh v. Central Bureau of Narcotics [(2013) 2 SCC 603] . It is also argued by learned counsel that when the recovery of contraband was made, the appellant was subjected to personal search but the Seizure Officer, while giving notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, has also given third option of search to be undertaken by himself and this aspect has not been examined in right perspective by the learned trial Court. In support thereof, learned counsel has placed reliance on a decision in case of State of Rajasthan v. Parmanand [(2014) 5 SCC 345] .