Rajasthan High Court
Satpal S/O Shri Natthuram B/C Bhat vs State Of Rajasthan on 31 August, 2021
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay Application No.3018/2021
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1324/2019
Satpal S/o Shri Natthuram Aged About 27 Years, R/o Dolta Wali
Dhani Ps Pilibanga Dist. Hanumangarh. (At Present In Dist. Jail
Jhunjhunu).
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Harendra Singh
For State : Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
Order
31/08/2021
1. Matter comes up on an application seeking stay of the
judgment of conviction dated 25.06.2019 passed against the
accused-appellant.
2. It is contended by counsel for the appellant that an
application for suspension of sentence was allowed by the Court
on 19.08.2019. However, now on the basis of the conviction, State
has passed the order dated 18.02.2021, dismissing the appellant
from the service. It is also contended that the appellant married
the complainant on 02.11.2006 and a child was born out of the
wed-lock in the year 2008. The Court below has convicted the
appellant for offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. as well as for
offence under Section 376 I.P.C. It is argued that if the conviction
(2 of 3) [CRLAS-1324/2019]
is for offence under Section 498-A of I.P.C., conviction under
Section 376 I.P.C. cannot be sustained and vice-versa.
3. Counsel for the appellant placed reliance on "Jagdish
Prasad vs. State of Rajasthan" 2013 SCC Online Raj 450.,
"Mahmood Khan vs. State of Rajasthan" (S.B. Criminal Misc.
Stay Application No.6932/2017 in S.B. Criminal Appeal
No.62/2009), "Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang & Ors."
(1995) 2 SCC 513, "Avinash vs. State of Rajasthan" (S.B.
Criminal Misc. Stay Application No.3138/2020 in S.B. Criminal
Appeal No.2326/2019), "Subhash Kholiya vs. State of
Rajasthan" (S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay Application No.1602/2017
in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.317/2017), ""Bhavya Raj & Ors. vs.
State of Rajasthan" (S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay Application
No.4681/2018 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1508/2016) and "Om
Prakash vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay
Application No.381/2017 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1276/2016).
4. It is argued that appellant is a Doctor who was serving the
State and because of the conviction order, his service has been
dismissed. It is also contended that if the consequences of
conviction are made known to the Court, the Court is empowered
to stay the conviction order. Reliance has been place on "Navjot
Singh Sidhu vs. State of Punjab & Anr." (2007) 2 SCC 574,
5. I have considered the contentions.
6. Apex Court in "Navjot Singh Sidhu vs. State of Punjab &
Anr." (supra) observed that granting stay of conviction is not the
rule but is an exception to be resorted to in rare cases depending
upon the facts of the case, but if the consequences of conviction
are made known to the Court, the Court is empowered to stay the
conviction order.
(3 of 3) [CRLAS-1324/2019]
7. In "Avinash vs. State of Rajasthan" (supra) the employee
was dismissed from the service on account of his conviction. Co-
ordinate Bench placing reliance on "Rama Narang vs. Ramesh
Narang & Ors." (supra) held that while granting a stay of
suspension of the order of conviction, Court must examine the
pros and cons and if it feels satisfied that a case is made out for
grant of such an order, it may do so. Co-ordinate Bench in that
case stayed the order of conviction.
8. In "Subhash Kholiya vs. State of Rajasthan" (supra)
applicant prayed that he would be removed from the service and
will have an adverse effect on his service, if the conviction is not
stayed. This Court stayed the conviction order.
9. The accused appellant in this case has served the
Government for so many years. His sentence has been suspended
by the Court. The consequences of not suspending the conviction
order would have serious effect on his career. He has been
dismissed from his service vide order dated 18.02.2021.
10. Considering the above, I deem it proper to stay the
conviction order.
11. Consequently, it is directed that the judgment of conviction
dated 25.06.2019 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge
No.2, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan in Sessions Case No.63/2012
(35/2009) State vs. Nathuram, remain stayed till pendency of the
appeal.
12. Stay application is disposed of.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J
AMIT KUMAR /47
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
