Randhir Kumar vs. State of H.P. Cr. Appeal (C-SB) No. 166 of 2026 Reserved on: 25.8.2026 02.9.2026 Present: Mr Arsh Chauhan, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr Jitender Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents-State. CrMP No. 3011 of 2026 The appellant/applicant has filed the present application for suspension of the sentence imposed by learned Special Judge, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Trial Court) on 19.6.2026, vide which the applicant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years, pay a fine of ₹1,00,000/- (₹One Lakh) and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one year for the commission of offence punishable under Section 21(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act). He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two and a half years for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was asserted that the applicant has a very good arguable case in his favour and no recovery was made from him. The recovery was made from a concealed space in the motorcycle which was being driven by the co-accused Dalip Kumar. The learned Trial Court erred in holding that the applicant was in conscious possession of narcotic substance. The report of FSL shows that the parcel alleged to have been carried by the applicant was not a sample of narcotic drugs. The applicant was admitted on bail during the trial. He has not misused the concession of the bail extended to him. As per the prosecution, 9.56 grams of heroin was recovered. The applicant had undergone a substantial part of the imprisonment that can be awarded to him. Hence, it was prayed that the present application be allowed and the sentence awarded by the learned Trial Court be suspended during the pendency of the appeal. 2. The application is opposed by filing a reply asserting that the police had apprehended the applicant and the co-accused on 12.9.2019. The police checked the motorcycle on which the applicant and the co-accused were travelling and recovered heroin. The learned Trial Court found the applicant guilty after the conclusion of the trial. There is no error in the appreciation of the evidence, and the appeal is likely to be dismissed. Hence, it was prayed that the present application be dismissed. 3. I have heard Mr Arsh Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellant/applicant and Mr Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State. 4. Mr Arsh Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellant/applicant, submitted that 9.56 grams of heroin was found in the possession of the applicant as per the prosecution and if the principle of proportionality applies to the present case, the applicant has undergone the substantial part of the imprisonment that can be awarded to him. The appeal is not likely to be taken up for hearing soon. Therefore, he prayed that the present application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail. 5. Mr Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State, submitted that the learned Trial Court has passed a well-reasoned judgment and the appeal is likely to be dismissed. Hence, he prayed that the present application be dismissed. 6. I have given considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully. 7. The judgment of the learned Trial Court shows that the applicant was found to be in possession of 9.56 grams of heroin. The Central Government has notified 250 grams of heroin as the commercial quantity, which means that a person possessing 250 grams of heroin can be sentenced to imprisonment of 10 years. If the principle of proportionality applies to the present case, the sentence imposed by the learned Trial Court is prima facie excessive. 8. Custody certificate shows that the applicant had undergone 10 months and 14 days imprisonment till 4.8.2026, which means that the applicant has undergone a substantial part of the imprisonment that can be awarded to him in case of his conviction. The appeal was filed in the year 2026, and this Court has a Roster to hear criminal appeals for the year 2025; hence, the present appeal is not likely to come up for hearing soon. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to the suspension of the sentence. 9. In view of the above, the present application is allowed, and the substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded by the learned Trial Court is suspended subject to deposit of fine and furnishing of personal and surety bonds in the sum of ₹25,000/- each, undertaking to appear before this Court as and when directed to do so and surrender before the learned Trial Court in case of dismissal of the appeal. 10. The bail bonds so furnished by the applicant/appellant be transmitted to this Court for record. 11. The present application stands disposed of. Cr. Appeal (C-SB) No. 166 of 2026 12. The record has been received. List the matter(s) for hearing in due course. (Rakesh Kainthla) Judge 2nd September, 2026 (Chander)