JASVEER SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused-appellant has preferred this second application under Section 389 Cr.P.C., 1973 seeking suspension of sentence handed down by learned trial Court vide its judgment dated 27.10.2016. The learned trial Court, by the impugned judgment has indicted appellant for offence punishable under Section 8 read with Section 15 of the NDPS Act and handed down sentence of ten years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to undergo sentence for one year's rigorous imprisonment. Likewise, for offence under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, learned trial Court handed down sentence of one year simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/-, and in default of payment of fine to undergo sentence for five days' simple imprisonment.

(2.) First application for suspension of sentence on behalf of appellant was dismissed on 24.01.2018 while granting liberty to renew the prayer after six months.

(3.) Arguing on this second application for suspension of sentence, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that during trial and after passing of impugned judgment, appellant remained in custody for almost five years and four months, therefore, solely on account of prolonged custody, his sentence may be suspended. In support thereof, learned counsel has placed reliance on decisions of the Supreme Court in cases of Thana Singh v. Central Bureau of Narcotics [(2013) 2 SCC 603]. and Mayuresh Nandkumar Purohit v. Kaushik Manna and Anr. [2018 Cr.L.R.(SC) 251]. It is also submitted by learned counsel that although the appellant was subjected to personal search but strict compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act was not made by Seizure Officer and the said aspect has not been examined by the learned trial Court in right perspective. It is also submitted by learned counsel that while drawing samples from seized contraband, requisite procedure was not followed and the poppy straw recovered from different bags was mixed for drawl of samples. In support thereof, learned counsel has placed reliance on a decision rendered in case of Netram v. State of Rajasthan [2014 (2) WLN 394 (Raj.)]. Lastly, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that sentence of co-accused has already been suspended by this Court, while deciding S.B. Suspension of Sentence (Appeal) No.709/2018, therefore, on parity also indulgence may also be granted to the appellant.