Appeal unlikely to be heard early: Supreme Court suspends sentence of man found with 1 kg Heroin

The Supreme Court recently suspended the sentence of a man convicted under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) after noting that his appeal was not likely to be heard early [Mossa Koya KP v. State]..The appellant and other co-accused were charged with joint possession of 1 kg of heroin, and conspiracy under Section 29 of the NDPS Act. The appellant had already spent 8 years in custody out of a total sentence of 10 years' imprisonment.Considering that the appellant would have undergone his entire sentence by the time his appeal is heard by the Delhi High Court, a Division Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna suspended his sentence in terms of Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) 1973."Yet the Court cannot be unmindful of the fact that the appellant has undergone 8 years out of the total sentence of 10 years. The appeal is unlikely to be heard early. In all probability, the entire sentence would have been undergone by the time the appeal is heard.".In 2013, a first information report (FIR) was lodged against the appellant and other co-accused under various provisions of the NDPS Act. The appellant and another co-accused were charged with joint possession of 1 kg of heroin, recovered from a hotel room in Udaipur. They were charged for conspiracy under Section 29 of the NDPS Act.A Special Judge at the Patiala House Courts acquitted the appellant and co-accused of the charge of joint possession punishable under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act. However, the appellant was convicted under Section 29 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of ₹ 1,00,000 with a default sentence.On May 18 this year, the Delhi High Court had declined to suspend the sentence of the appellant on the ground that he had not completed fifteen months in jail after the order of conviction was passed..Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain appearing for the State argued that it would be appropriate if the Court could consider expediting the hearing of the appeal, but since the conviction is under the NDPS Act, the prayer for suspension of sentence may not be considered.While appreciating the submission of the ASG with regard to the seriousness of the offence committed by the appellant, the Bench said that it could not be unmindful of the time the accused had already spent in custody. The Court thus observed:"The decisions on the basis of which the High Court of Delhi has declined to grant suspension of sentence, are, at the highest, a broad guideline and cannot be placed on the same pedestal as a statutory interdict. With the pendency of the work in the High Court, it may not be feasible to expedite the disposal of the appeal within a short period.".While noting that a proper case has been made out for suspension of sentence, the Supreme Court directed that the sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended under Section 389 of the CrPC, subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Special Judge.The Court also directed the appellant to cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the appeal, and not to apply for adjournment when the matter is taken up. Consequently, the order of the Delhi High Court declining to suspend the sentence was set aside.Advocates Tanya Agarwal and Eliza Siram along with Advocate-on-Record Anil Kumar appeared for the appellant. ASG Jain along with Advocates Praveena Gautam, Anmol Chandan, Shiv Mangal Sharma, Raghvendra Srivastava and Advocate-on-Record Gurmeet Singh Makker represented the State..[Read Judgment]