Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Ballu Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 May, 2026
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2026
(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO(S).5717/2026)
BALLU SINGH APPELLANT
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH RESPONDENT
O R D E R
Leave granted.
This criminal appeal challenges the order dated
12.11.2025 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh,
Bench at Indore, in I.A.No.10490/2025 in Criminal Appeal
No.9758 of 2024, whereby the appellant’s application for
suspension of sentence was dismissed.
The appellant faced trial in connection with a crime
registered pursuant to FIR 0056/2021 dated 26.12.2021
lodged with P.S. Narcotics Cell, Indore in respect of the
offences punishable under Section 8 read with Section
20(b)(ii)(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985 [in short “NDPS”].
Signature Not Verified The trial court, in the Sessions Case No.17/2022
Digitally signed by
BORRA LM VALLI
Date: 2026.05.08
14:48:19 IST
Reason: convicted the appellant for the offences under Sections 8
1
read with Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS vide judgment
dated 26.07.2024 and awarded a sentence of rigorous
imprisonment for a period of fifteen years along with
fine of Rs.1,50,000/-.
The appellant, being aggrieved by the order of
conviction passed by the trial court, filed Criminal
Appeal (DB) No.9758/2024 before the High Court and the
same is pending adjudication. During the pendency of the
said criminal appeal, the appellant filed an
I.A.No.10490/2025 before the High Court seeking
suspension of sentence. The High Court, by the impugned
order dated 12.11.2025, dismissed the application filed
by the appellant for suspension of sentence. Hence, the
present criminal appeal.
This Court, vide its order dated 24.03.2026, issued
notice in the instant matter.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant in support
of the appeal and learned counsel for the respondent-
State and perused the material on record.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
High Court was not right in dismissing his application IA
No.823 of 2025 filed in Criminal Appeal No.9758 of 2024
seeking suspension of his sentence being fifteen years of
2
rigorous imprisonment and payment of fine of
Rs.1,50,000/-; the Sessions Court as well as the High
Court have not appreciated the innocence of the appellant
as such; more over he is 60 years of age and he has
already undergone four years’ five months imprisonment;
the appellant has a good case on merits. In the
circumstances, the impugned order may be set aside and
the application filed by the appellant for suspension of
sentence and bail may be granted subject to the terms and
conditions that may be imposed.
Per contra, learned Deputy Advocate General
appearing for the respondent-State with reference to the
counter–affidavit contended that the evidence as against
the appellant is specific and clear; that three quintals
and 41 kilograms of ganja was found close to the place
where the appellant was sitting; there has been no
rebuttal evidence. In the circumstances, the High Court
was justified in declining to grant the interim relief
granted by the appellant herein. Learned Deputy Advocate
General submitted that there is no merit in this appeal.
Hence, the same may be dismissed.
We have considered the arguments advanced at the bar
and also perused the material on record.
3
We note that the Criminal Appeal is of the year 2024
and that it would inevitably take considerable time for
the adjudication of the said appeal on merits.
We find that the appellant has already spent four
years and five months in jail and he is about 60 years’
of age.
Taking into consideration these aspects, we suspend
the sentence imposed upon the appellant by the Sessions
Court.
Consequently, we allow this appeal and direct as
under:
“The appellant shall be produced before the
concerned Trial Court as early as possible and the
Trial Court shall release him on bail, subject to such
conditions as it may deem appropriate to impose to
ensure his presence in the proceedings.”
The appellant shall appear before the High Court as
and when directed to do so.
It is directed that the appellant shall extend
complete cooperation in the hearing of the appeal before
the High Court. The appellant shall not misuse his
liberty in any manner.
4
Any infraction of the conditions may entailcancellation of the suspension of sentence and bail
granted to the appellant.
With these observations, the criminal appeal is
allowed.
………………………………………………………, J
(B.V. NAGARATHNA)…………………………………………………………, J
(UJJAL BHUYAN)
NEW DELHI;
MAY 8, 2026.
5
ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.4 SECTION II-E
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).
5717/2026
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-
11-2025 in IA No. 10490/2025 passed by the High Court of
Madhya Pradesh at Indore]BALLU SINGH Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondent(s)
FOR ADMISSION
IA No. 78123/2026 – CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING /
CURING THE DEFECTS
IA No. 78122/2026 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.Date : 08-05-2026 This matter was called on for hearing
today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYANFor Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pulkit Tare, Adv.
Mr. Anup Jain, Adv.
Mr. Sandeepan Pathak, Adv.
Ms. Nishtha Goel, Adv.
M/s Expletus Legal, AOR
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rudraditya Khare, D.A.G.
Mr. Ajay Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR
Ms. Maitreyee Jagat Joshi, Adv.
Mr. Astik Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Akanksha Tomar, Adv.
Mr. Shravan Bagora, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R6
Leave granted.
Appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order,
which is placed on file.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
(B. LAKSHMI MANIKYA VALLI) (DIVYA BABBAR)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)7
