Nathu Singh vs State
2021 Latest Caselaw 9266 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 227/2021

Nathu Singh S/o Bhur Singh, Aged About 67 Years, B/c Rajpurohit, R/o Village Rewada, Teh. Dungargarh, Dist. Bikaner. (Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner).

----Petitioner Versus State, Through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhawani Singh Mertia.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Joshi, PP.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

Order

28/04/2021

Learned Public Prosecutor has chosen not to file reply to this

application for suspension of sentences and proposes to argue the

matter orally.

Heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused

the impugned Judgment and the material available on record.

The appellant applicant herein stands convicted and

sentenced as below vide judgment dated 23.02.2021 passed by

the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.2, Bikaner (Camp at

Dungargarh, District Bikaner) in Sessions Case No.3/2015:

Offences               Sentences                 Fine            Fine   Default
                                                                 sentences
Section 302/34 IPC Life                          Rs.10,000/- 6 Months' S.I.
                   Imprisonment
Section 323/34 IPC 1 Year's S.I.                 Rs.1,000/-      1 Month's S.I.
Section 323 IPC        1 Year's S.I.             Rs.1,000/-      1 Month's S.I.


                                         (2 of 4)                [SOSA-227/2021]

Learned counsel Shri Mertia representing the applicant

appellant, points out that the eye-witnesses Kan Singh (PW-1) and

Khushbu (PW-4) have both stated that the appellant was armed

with a lathi whereas the co-accused Sampat Singh and Mangilal

were armed with the axes. As per the witnesses, all the three

accused gave blows of their respective weapons on the head and

neck of the deceased Satyanarain @ Sattu Singh. Drawing the

Court's attention to the evidence of the Medical Jurists Dr. Sanjay

Kumar (PW-5) and Dr. Gaurav Joshi (PW-9), Shri Mertia pointed

out that only a single injury on the head of the deceased was

noticed by the medical experts when autopsy was carried out and

postmortem report (Ex.P/16) was issued. He drew the Court's

attention to the finding recorded at page No.109 of the impugned

Judgment wherein, the trial court has held that either Sampat

Singh or Mangilal gave blows of their weapons to Satyanarain @

Sattu Singh and caused him the single head injury. He thus urges

that the appellant has strong prima-facie case for assailing the

impugned Judgment. Shri Mertia urged that the appellant was on

bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted to him

and hence, he deserves the same indulgence during the pendency

of the appeal as well.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently and

fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's

counsel. However, he too is not in a position to dispute the fact

that the assailants are three in number whereas only a single

injury was found on the head of the deceased Satyanarain @

Sattu Singh as per the postmortem report (Ex.P/16). The trial

court itself has recorded a pertinent finding in the impugned

(3 of 4) [SOSA-227/2021]

Judgment that this injury could be attributed to the co-accused

Sampat Singh or Mangilal.

In this background, we are of the view that the appellant has

available to him strong grounds so as to assail the impugned

Judgment. Hearing of the appeal is unlikely in the near future.

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 appellant, during

pendency of the appeal.

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, No.2, Bikaner (Camp at Dungargarh, District Bikaner), vide

judgment dated 23.02.2021 in Sessions Case No.3/2015 against

the appellant-applicant Nathu Singh, shall remain suspended till

final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on

bail, provided he 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 his appearance in this

court on 28.05.2021 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

(4 of 4) [SOSA-227/2021]

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.

(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J

4-Tikam/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)