1 S.B.CR.MISC.APPLLICATION FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE NO.1088/2007 (Naresh Kumar Vs. State of Raj.) IN S.B.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.894/2007 Date of order :: 24.01.2008 HON'BLE MR. KRISHAN KUMAR ACHARYA, J. Mr.Anil Joshi for Mr.M.K.Garg, for the applicant-appellant. Mr.Ashok Upadhyay, Public Prosecutor. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor on application under Section 389 Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence. The main contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that Fard Recovery Exhibit-P/3 has been prepared at 6:55 PM on 25.2.2005 and notice Exhibit-P/7 under Section 50 of the NDPS Act has been given at 7:00 PM, therefore, it cannot be said that compliance of provisions under Section 50 of the NDPS Act has been done. It is next contended that only 50 gm. Smack is said to have been recovered, which is below commercial quantity. The appellant is not habitual offender. He was on bail during the course of trial. In last, he prays that accused-appellant 2 has arguable case and hearing of the appeal will take time, therefore, the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant may be suspended during the pendency of the appeal. He will not misuse the bail. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this application seeking suspension of sentence and stated that from the evidence, it appears that compliance of Section 50 of the NDPS Act has been done. He prays that looking to the nature of offence, the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant may not be suspended. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the complete record as well as judgment impugned. The recovered article is below commercial quantity. Accused-appellant was on bail during the course of trial. It will be considered at the time of final hearing of the appeal whether the compliance of the provisions of Section 50 NDPS Act has been done or not. At this stage, without commenting on the merit of the case, looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that accused-appellant has arguable case and hearing of the appeal 3 will take time, I deem it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant. Accordingly, the application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Sri Ganganagar vide his judgment dated 1.11.2007 in Sessions Case No.45/2005 against the accused-appellant Naresh Kumar S/o Shri Khema Ram shall remain suspended till the final disposal of aforesaid appeal provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) along with two sureties in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance in this Court on 25.2.2008 and whenever called upon to do so. (KRISHAN KUMAR ACHARYA), J. NK