Praveen vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 9273 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 134/2021

1. Praveen S/o Kishan Lal Mehta, Aged About 20 Years, Mavli Dangiyan, P.s. Kheroda, District Udaipur (Raj.).

2. Manoj S/o Ghanshyam Menaria, Aged About 20 Years, Menar, P.s. Kheroda, District Udaipur (Raj.). (At Present Lodged At Central Jail Udaipur).

----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K. Charan through VC.

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

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

Order

28/04/2021

Heard learned counsel representing the applicants-appellants

and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the impugned

judgment and the material available on record.

The appellants applicants herein stand convicted for the

offences under Sections 302, 460 and 394 IPC vide judgment

dated 20.11.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge No.4, Udaipur in Sessions Case No.93/2014 (1182/2014)

and sentenced to life imprisonment.

Shri Charan, learned counsel representing the applicants

appellants, vehemently and fervently urges that the entire

prosecution case as against the appellants is fabricated. There is

no evidence worth the name of the record of the case to connect

(2 of 3) [SOSA-134/2021]

the appellants with the crime. The star prosecution witness Amrit

Bai (PW-2) did not identify the alleged assailants. The appellants

have been implicated in this case solely on the basis of recovery of

currency notes and a gold Madaliya (allegedly recovered from

Praveen). He points out that the currency notes are not

identifiable property. The identification of Madaliya is not reliable

because the identifying witness Amrit Bai (PW-2) admitted in her

cross-examination that the police told that her goods were to be

identified. He further points out that the appellants were on bail

during trial and hence, they deserve the same indulgence, during

pendency of the appeal.

Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, vehemently

and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by appellants'

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

that other than the so-called incriminating recoveries, referred to

supra, there is hardly any evidence so as to connect the appellants

with the crime. The appellants were on bail during trial and did not

misuse the liberty so granted to them. Hearing of the appeal is

likely to consume time.

In this background, we are of the view that the applicants

appellants have available to them strong grounds so as to assail

the impugned Judgment and thus, it is considered just and proper

to suspend the sentences awarded to them, 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.4, Udaipur, vide judgment dated 20.11.2020 in Sessions

Case No.93/2014 (1182/2014) against the appellants-applicants

(3 of 3) [SOSA-134/2021]

(1) Praveen and (2) Manoj, 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

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 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

3-Tikam/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)