HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 139/2022 Ramandeep Kaur @ Roma W/o Jasvinder Singh, Aged About 30 Years, D/o Sukha Singh, R/o Daulatpura, Police Station Matili Rathan, At Present Resident 13 Bb, Police Station Padampur, District Sriganganagar. (Presently Lodged At Mahila Bandi Sudhar Grah, Bikaner)
----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent Connected With D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 112/2022 Rajendrapal @ Raju S/o Harphool Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/ o 01 C.c. Police Station Padampur District Sri Ganganagar. (At Present Lodged In Sriganganagar Jail)
----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Sahran} Mr. S.K. Verma} For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Chhaparwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 15/03/2022 Heard learned counsel representing the parties. Perused the impugned Judgment and the material available on record. (Downloaded on 15/03/2022 at 08:52:17 PM)
(2 of 4) [SOSA-139/2022]
The appellants applicants herein stand convicted and
sentenced as below vide judgment dated 28.09.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Karanpur, District Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.07/2017:
Offences u/s Sentences Fine Amount In default
302 IPC L.I. Rs.2,000/- 1 Month R.I.
201 IPC 7 Years R.I. Rs.2,000/- 1 Month R.I.
120-B IPC L.I. Rs.2,000/- 1 Month R.I.
The applicants-appellants have preferred these applications under Section 389 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for being released on bail during pendency of the appeal.
Learned counsel Shri Rajesh Saharan and Shri S.K. Verma representing the appellants applicants, vehemently and fervently contended that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. They submit that the case against the present applicants is purely based on circumstantial evidence as there is no eye-witness of the incident. They further submit that there is no direct substantive evidence on record which can connect the accused with the murder of Jasvinder Singh. They further submit that evidence of the prosecution witnesses namely P.W. 1 Iqbal Singh, P.W.2 Malkeet Singh, P.W. 3 Baldev Singh and P.W. 4 Rajendra Singh @ Bholu, who gave evidence of extra judicial confession by the accused Ramandeep Kaur @ Roma is totally unbelievable, as it was extracted under police threat. Lastly, they submit that hearing of appeal will consume time, therefore, the sentence awarded to the appellants may be suspended during pendency of the appeal.
Learned Public Prosecutor has filed reply to the application for suspension of sentences and opposed the application for (Downloaded on 15/03/2022 at 08:52:17 PM) (3 of 4) [SOSA-139/2022] suspension of sentence but he too, is not in a position to dispute the above facts.
We have heard and considered the submissions advanced by the appellants' counsel and the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the impugned Judgment as well as the record.
There are significant contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses regarding the theory of extra judicial confession.
In wake of the discussion made herein above, we are of the opinion that the appellants have available to them strong and plausible grounds for assailing the impugned Judgment. Hearing of the appeal is likely to consume time. The appellants have remained in custody for the last nearly 05 years 3 months and 13 days till 04.03.2022.
In this view of the matter and, having regard to the facts and circumstance as available on record, it is considered just and proper to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellants, during pendency of the appeals.
Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Karanpur District Sri Ganganagar, vide judgment dated 28.09.2021 in Sessions Case No.07/2017 against the appellants- applicants (i)Ramandeep Kaur @ Roma W/o Jasvinder Singh and
(ii) Rajendrapal @ Raju S/o Harphool Ram shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on bail, provided each of them executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance in this (Downloaded on 15/03/2022 at 08:52:17 PM) (4 of 4) [SOSA-139/2022] court on 18.04.2022 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.
The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant(s) was/were tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said accused applicant(s) does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J 45-Mamta/-
(Downloaded on 15/03/2022 at 08:52:17 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)