2026:HHC:2500 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP No. 5243 of 2025 in Cr. Appeal No. 123 of 2023 Reserved on: 07.01.2026 Date of Decision:08.01.2026 ____________________________________________________ Diwan Chand ...Appellant/Appellant. Versus State of H.P. ...Respondent. Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant/appellant: Mr. Manoj Pathak, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Sharmila Patial, Additional Advocate General. 4._ __________________________________________________ Romesh Verma , Judge This order shall dispose of an application filed by the applicant/appellant under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for the suspension of sentence passed by the learned Special Judge-II, Kinnaur at Rampur, District Shimla, HP passed in Case Regd. No.NDPS/2/2021, titled State of HP Vs. Raj Kumar and Anr., decided on 28.03.2023, vide which applicant/appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:2500 (ii)(c) read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac and in default of payment of fine, he has been further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. 2. It has been stated in the application that applicant has got strong prima facie case in his favour. Disposal of the present appeal will take some time and in case sentence imposed by the learned Court below, is not suspended in that event the very purpose of filing the appeal shall be frustrated. 3. The said application has been opposed vehemently by the learned Additional Advocate General for the State. It has been averred in the reply filed by the State that there is no infirmity in the judgment as passed by the learned Court below and applicant has rightly been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act. 4. It has been submitted in the reply that the present applicant/appellant was a party to the criminal conspiracy and in pursuance to such criminal conspiracy accused Raj Kumar was found in conscious and exclusive 3 2026:HHC:2500 possession of 2.058 Kgs charas/cannabis, which is of commercial quantity and present applicant/appellant was doing the business of selling narcotic being drug peddler alongwith him. 5. It has been stated in the reply that keeping in view the heinousness and gravity of the offence and its social impact, in case the present application is allowed, it would be detrimental to public interest and would further set a wrong precedent. 6. We have heard Mr. Manoj Pathak, Advocate, for the applicant/appellant and Ms. Sharmila Patial, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent/State. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant has vehemently argued that as per the case of the prosecution, police personnel were patrolling at Barubag on Rampur-Shimla National Highway. At about 9:50 AM, a Bolero car bearing registration No. HP-35-5777 came from Rampur side and it was signaled to stop. On inquiry, a person who was driving the vehicle disclosed his name to be Sh. Raj Kumar, who got nervous and Police party got suspected that he might be carrying some objectionable article. In the presence of the 4 2026:HHC:2500 witnesses, the vehicle of accused Raj Kumar was checked and one micron bag of rice reddish yellow in colour with one chain and two strips was found under the Conductor seat. Upon opening the same, four transparent packets containing black coloured stick/ball shaped substance was found. The accused namely Raj Kumar confirmed the contraband to be charas, which upon weighing, was found to be 2.058 Kgs. 8. The learned counsel for the applicant/appellant has submitted that the contraband was found from the conscious possession of accused Raj Kumar. He has placed on record the copy of the order as passed by this Court in Cr.MP No. 3588 of 2024 in Cr. Appeal No. 124 of 2023 dated 14.10.2024, whereby this Court vide its order suspended the sentence imposed upon the accused Raj Kumar. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant has argued that since main accused in the case from whose conscious possession the contraband was found has been enlarged on bail by suspending the sentence, therefore, under such circumstances, he is entitled for the grant of similar relief. 5 2026:HHC:2500 10. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we are of the opinion that applicant/appellant has made out a prima facie case in his favour for his enlargement on bail by suspending his substantive sentence. The instant appeal pertains to year 2023 and the same is not likely to be decided in near future and there is nothing on record to suggest that the delay in deciding the appeal is attributable to the applicant/appellant. Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances, the execution of judgment of conviction and order of sentence as passed passed by the learned Special Judge-II, Kinnaur at Rampur, District Shimla, HP shall remain suspended till final disposal of the main appeal . 11. In view of above, the present application is allowed and the substantive sentence imposed upon the applicant/ appellant by the Court below is suspended subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court below within a period of four weeks from today undertaking therein to appear before the Court as and when directed to do so and also to surrender before the Court in case of dismissal 6 2026:HHC:2500 of his appeal. Bail bonds so furnished by the applicant shall be transmitted by the Court below to this Court for placing the same on record. 12. Before parting, it is made clear that any observation made here-in-above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the main case and the same shall be adjudicated upon uninfluenced by any observations made here-in-above, which are only for the purpose of determination of the instant application. 13. Parties are permitted to produce a copy of this order downloaded from the web-page of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh before the Court below and the Court below shall not insist for production of a certified copy of order, rather, the Court below shall verify passing of this order from the web- page of the High Court. ( Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge (Romesh Verma) Judge January 8, 2026(Nisha) VEENA SHARMA Digitally signed by VEENA SHARMA Date: 2026.01.08 18:00:26 +0530