Rahul v. State of Himachal Pradesh Cr.MP(M) No. 1284 of 2026 17.7.2026 Present: Mr. Jeevan Kumar, Advocate, for the applicant/appellant. Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for the non- applicant/respondent/State. Cr.MP(M) No. 1284 of 2026 By way of instant application, prayer has been made by the applicant/appellant for condonation of delay in maintaining the accompanying appeal, which is barred by limitation. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General while accepting notice on behalf of the respondent- State states that he does not intend to file reply to the application and has no objection in case prayer made in the application is allowed. For the reasons stated in the application, this Court is convinced and satisfied that delay in maintaining the accompanying appeal is neither intentional nor willful, rather same has occurred on account of circumstances, which were completely beyond the control of the applicant, as such, delay, which has been sufficiently explained, is condoned. The application is disposed of. Cr.Appeal No. of 2026 (CR.A (C- SB)ST/5901/26) Be registered. Admit. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, waives post admission service on behalf of the respondent-State. List in due course. Record be called for. Cr.MP No. of 2026 (CRMPST/5902/26) By way of instant application filed under Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, prayer has been made by the applicant/appellant for suspension of sentence and releasing him on bail during the pendency of the appeal. Prayer made in the application has been opposed by the respondent-State on the ground that applicant/appellant is accused of heinous crime having adverse impact on the society and in the event of his being enlarged on bail, he may flee from justice. In the case at hand, applicant/appellant stands convicted and sentenced by the learned Special Judge-cum- Principal Judge, Family Court, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- each under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Having perused the grounds taken in the appeal vis-à-vis impugned judgment, there appears to be merit in the contention of learned counsel for the applicant/appellant that there are arguable points involved in the appeal and since considerable time is likely to be consumed in the conclusion of the appeal, prayer made on behalf of the applicant/appellant for suspension of sentence during the pendency of the appeal deserves to be allowed. In these circumstances, the substantive sentence imposed by learned Special Judge-cum- Principal Judge, Family Court, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh in RBT Case No. 128-D/Vii/023/2020 vide judgment dated 27.2.2026, is suspended during the pendency of the appeal and the applicant/appellant is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court within a period of six weeks with the conditions that he shall appear in the Court as and when directed and shall surrender to serve out the sentence imposed in case his appeal is ultimately dismissed. This order is further subject to the applicant’s depositing the entire amount of fine, if not already deposited, within the afore period before the trial Court. Applicant is permitted to produce copy of order downloaded from the High Court Website and the trial court shall not insist for certified copy of the order, however, it may verify the order from the High Court website or otherwise. The application stands disposed of. Cr.MP No. of 2026 (CRMPST/5904/26) The application is disposed of with direction to the applicant to file certified copy of the judgment in question within four weeks. July 17, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), manjit Judge