Rajasthan High Court
Billu @ Bablu S/O Shri Ramesh Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 August, 2021
Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Rameshwar Vyas
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc. II Suspension of Sentence Application
No.529/2021
in
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 99/2017
Billu @ Bablu S/o Shri Ramesh Meena, R/o Beechlawas Agavali,
Police Station Sikandara, Distt. Dausa Raj. (At Present Special
Central Jail, Salyawas, District Dausa)
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Amir Aziz
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Alka Bhatnagar, AGA
Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS
Order
16/08/2021
The instant second application for suspension of
sentences under Section 389 CrPC is preferred on behalf of the
appellant-applicant Billu @ Bablu S/o Ramesh Meena, who has
been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 302
and 323 IPC vide the judgment dated 06.12.2016 passed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bandikui, District Dausa in
Sessions Case No.46/2011.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public
Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant and perused
the material available on record.
The first application for suspension of sentences filed on
behalf of the appellant was rejected by this court on 05.07.2017
(2 of 3) [SOSA-529/2021]
and the Registry was directed to list the appeal for hearing, but for
one reason or the other, the appeal has not been taken up for
hearing and in these circumstances, the instant second application
for suspension of sentences has been moved. The appellant has
suffered the custodial period of seven and half years.
The learned trial court has itself observed at page
No.31 of the impugned judgment that the complainant Ramratan
(P.W.1) has set out an exaggerated version of the incident in the
FIR as well as in his sworn testimony. The pertinent case of the
prosecution witnesses is that the appellant herein gave a lathi
blow on the head of the deceased Jansiram.
On going through the evidence of the Medical Jurist Dr.
Deepali Pathak (P.W.11), it is apparent that there was one injury
on the head of the deceased caused by a blunt weapon, which
proved fatal. The said head injury is no doubt attributed by the
witnesses to the appellant. However, the incident appears to have
taken place on the spur of the moment after heated exchange of
profanities between the accused and the complainant party over a
trivial issue. The appellant has suffered custodial period of more
than seven and half years. He does not have any criminal
antecedents.
In this background and having regard to the over all
facts and circumstances as available on record and the bleak
chances of early hearing of the appeal, this Court is of the opinion
that it is a fit case for suspending the sentences awarded to the
accused appellant during the pendency of the appeal.
Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence
filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentences passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
(3 of 3) [SOSA-529/2021]
Bandikui, District Dausa vide judgment dated 06.12.2016 in
Sessions Case No.46/2011 against the appellant-applicant Billu @
Bablu S/o Ramesh Meena, 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 17.09.2021
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
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.
(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
Pramod/Arun Bathla /365
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
