2021 (3) TMI 570

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... sentence under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, "CrPC" has been allowed. 3 The respondent has been convicted of offences punishable under Sections 23(c) and 25A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985, "NDPS Act". He has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years in respect of the offence under Section 23(c) and for three years under the provisions of Section 25A, apart from fine. 4 Briefly stated, on 2 December 2015, the IO of the Narcotics Control Bureau, Delhi Zonal Unit received a phone call from DHL Courier that two parcels were lying in the office and were suspected to contain narcotic drugs. Accordingly, a team of the Narcotics Control Bureau, Delhi Zonal Unit, reached t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arrest the consignor. He also submits that since the appeal is likely to take some time to come up for final hearing, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the appellant in jail till such time and prays that the appellant's sentence may be suspended during the pendency of the appeal." 6 The application was opposed on behalf of the Narcotics Control Bureau by the Senior Standing Counsel, who appeared to oppose the suspension of sentence. The High Court, while passing an order of suspension of sentence, indicated its reasons in paragraph 4 of the order, which reads as follows: "4. Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case and the period undergone by the appellant and the fact that the appeal is not likely to be take....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e trial Court after conducting a trial has, on the basis of the evidence which is adduced, come to the conclusion that the offence has been established. In the present case, it was urged that absolutely no reasons have been indicated by the learned Single Judge of the High Court for granting bail, save and except for a vague reference to the "facts and circumstances" of the case, the period undergone by the respondent and the fact that the appeal was not likely to be taken for hearing in the near future due to the disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. 8 On the other hand, Ms Nidhi, learned counsel appearing through the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee to represent the respondent, has adverted to the judgment of the Trial Judge....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e on bail". Where the trial has ended in an order of conviction, the High Court, when a suspension of sentence is sought under Section 389(1) of CrPC, must be duly cognizant of the fact that a finding of guilt has been arrived at by the Trial Judge at the conclusion of the trial. This is not to say that the High Court is deprived of its power to suspend the sentence under Section 389(1) of CrPC. The High Court may do so for sufficient reasons which must have a bearing on the public policy underlying the incorporation of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. At this stage, we will refer to the decision of a two-Judge Bench of this Court in Preet Pal Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh (2020) 8 SCC 645 where Justice Indira Banerjee, speaking for the Court, ....