Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:
s. 389(1) r/w. s. 37 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – Suspension of sentence – Of the person convicted u/ss. 23(c) and 25A of NDPS Act – Granted by High Court during pendency of the appeal – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: Where trial has ended in conviction, High court should exercise its power to suspend the sentence for sufficient reasons, which must have bearing on the public policy underlying s. 37 NDPS Act – No case of suspension of sentence u/s. 389(1) is made out in the present case and hence not sustainable.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The offence of which the respondent has been convicted by the Special Judge arises out of the provisions of Sections 23(c) and 25A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). Section 37 of the NDPS Act stipulates that no person accused of an offence punishable for offences under Section 19 or Section 24 or Section 27A and also for offences involving a commercial quantity shall be released on bail, where the public prosecutor opposes the application, unless the Court is satisfied “that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while 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. [Para 9][542-D-H]
Preet Pal Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2020) 8 SCC 645; State of Kerala vs. Rajesh (2020) 12 SCC 122 – relied on.
2. The High Court in the present case, has not applied its mind to the governing provisions of the NDPS Act. On the basis of the material which emerged before the Special Judge and which forms the basis of the order of conviction, no case for suspension of sentence under Section 389(1) of CrPC was established. The order granting suspension of sentence under Section 389(1) of CrPC is unsustainable and would accordingly have to be set aside. [Para 10][543-F-G]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.