[2025:RJ-JP:29556] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 1192/2025 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1615/2025 Nathua Son Of Juhari, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of Faili Ka Pura Police Station Sadar Hindauncity District Karauli Rajasthan (At Present In District Jail Karauli) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Onkar Singh Rajpurohit, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 01/08/2025 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant - Nathua Son Of Juhari in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 04.06.2025 in Sessions Case No. 40/2013 passed by learned Special Judge (A.S.J. No.1), NDPS Act cases, Hindaun City, District Karauli whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 8/15 of NDPS Act and further sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of four years with fine of ₹30,000/- 2. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that appellant is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated in the instant case. He further submitted that the evidence on record clearly suggests that non-compliance [2025:RJ-JP:29556] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1192/2025] of provision under Section 42 of NDPS Act. He further submitted that on the basis of information to PW-11 Ramawtar Yadav, 7 kg 600 gram of poppy straw was recovered from possession of appellant accused but the source of information and taking action as per law were not informed to any senior officer before proceeding to recover contraband article. He further submitted that cross-examination of PW-11 makes it clear no independent witness was called before effecting search and seizure in the matter. He also referred non-compliance of mandatory provision under the NDPS Act particularly Section 50 and submitted that non-compliance is sufficient to show that it is a false case. He further referred discrepancies and contradictions in the statement of witnesses and non-compliance of Section 52-A of NDPS Act and submitted that the trial court has ignored the material provision before drawing the conclusion of conviction. At last, he submitted that there is no criminal antecedent against the appellant accused and he was on bail during trial. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificate and same is taken on record. 4. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On the basis of interception on 01.11.2012 by police party led by PW-11 Ramawtar 7kg 600 gram of poppy straw was recovered from conscious possession of appellant after drawing memos FIR no. 431/2012 was registered at P.S. Sadar, Hindaun City, District Karauli. After investigation a charge-sheet has been filed against appellant accused. After framing the charge [2025:RJ-JP:29556] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1192/2025] prosecution has examined 11 witnesses and exhibited 28 documents. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and he has not submitted any defence evidence except exhibiting 3 documents. The accused was convicted and sentenced. 6. This appellant was released on bail in pursuant to order dated 15.01.2013 in bail application by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindaun City, District Karauli under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The recovered quantity is higher than small quantity but quite less than commercial quantity. There is no criminal antecedent against appellant accused and disposal of appeal will take its own time, the grounds raised by learned counsel can be considered at the time of final adjudication. 7. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, but looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case to enlarge appellant on bail. 8. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellant can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is allowed and sentence of appellant accused- Nathua Son Of Juhari is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he would executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 25.11.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. After release of appellant on bail, he will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found [2025:RJ-JP:29556] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1192/2025] that he is involved in any criminal activity, the order shall be recalled. 2. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 3. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. 4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 5. In case, the applicant has violated any condition, then the order of SOS shall be recalled and cancelled. 9. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 10. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /9(sosa)