Dilip vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 12260 Raj

(1 of 4) [SOSA-395/2021]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc II Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 395/2021

Dilip S/o Shri Hurtan @ Hurtang, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Undvapati, P.s. Kushalgarh, District Banswara (Rajasthan). (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Uaipur).

                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Vikram Singh
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. R.R. Chhaparwal, PP



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA

Judgment

05/08/2021

This second application for suspension of sentences under

Section 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-

applicant Dilip who has been convicted and sentenced for the

offence under Section 302/34 IPC vide the judgment dated

08.01.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Banswara, Camp Kushalgarh in Sessions Case No.47/2016.

Learned Public Prosecutor has chosen not to file reply to the

application for suspension of sentence and proposed to argue the

matter orally.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

The first application for suspension of sentences filed on

behalf of the appellant was dismissed as, his counsel Shri

(2 of 4) [SOSA-395/2021]

Shambhoo Singh did not press the same after arguing the matter

at some length. Learned counsel Shri Vikram Singh representing

the appellant-applicant urged that the appellant-applicant was on

bail during the course of trial. He drew the Court's attention to the

statement of the star prosecution witness, the child Pappu (PW.2)

and urged that as per the evidence of this witness, the accused

Dilip and Tita both inflicted lathi blow to his father, the deceased

Dala. Attention of this Court was also drawn to the statement of

medical jurist Dr. Lalitpal (PW.12) who conducted postmortem on

the dead body of deceased Dala and it was urged that only one

injury on the head of the deceased was noticed which resulted into

fracture of the underlying bones and damaged brain causing

death. Shri Vikram Singh urged that as there is a distinct

allegation of the witness that two accused persons inflicted the

blow on the head of the deceased and as only one injury was

found on the head of the deceased, the ocular testimony is totally

contradicted by the evidence of the medical jurist. It was further

submitted that even if the prosecution case is admitted to be true,

at the highest, the offence, if any would not travel to beyond

Section 304 Part II/325 IPC. On these submissions, Shri Virkam

Singh craves acceptance of bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor 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 as per the

testimony of child witness Pappu PW.2, the appellant as well as

the co-accused Tita allegedly inflicted lathi blows on the head of

the deceased. As per the medical jurist Dr. Lalitpal (PW.12), only

one injury was found on the head of the deceased Dala when

postmortem was carried out.

(3 of 4) [SOSA-395/2021]

In this background, we are of the opinion that the appellant-

applicant has available to him strong grounds for assailing the

impugned judgment. Hearing of the appeal is likely to consume

time.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentences filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentences passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Banswara

Camp Kushalgarh vide judgment dated 08.01.2021 in Sessions

Case No.47/2016 (CIS No.113/2016) against the appellant-

applicant Dilip S/o Shri Hurtan @ Hurtang 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 07.09.2021 and whenever ordered to do so till the

disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his 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 in a separate file. Such file be

registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which

the accused-applicant was 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

(4 of 4) [SOSA-395/2021]

relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In

case the said accused applicant 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

8-/Sudhir Asopa/Devesh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)