Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Gurucharan Singh @ Bhola vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 December, 2021
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi, Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 676/2021
Gurucharan Singh @ Bhola S/o Saudagar Singh, Aged About 52
Years, Kalsiya Police Station Ramkot, Dist. Ludhiyana Punjab.
(The Appellant/convict Presently Lodged At The Central Jail,
Bikaner).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
08/12/2021
The instant application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been
filed by accused-appellant for suspending his sentence awarded by
learned trial Court vide judgment dated 18.08.2021 in Session
Case No.(CIS No.938/2014).
Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has submitted
that trial Court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the
accused-appellant vide impugned judgment. It is argued that the
prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence, however, if
the said evidence is assessed then it is clear that the prosecution
has failed to prove the guilt of accused-appellant beyond
reasonable doubt. Learned counsel has submitted that the trial
Court has placed heavy reliance on evidence of PW.5-Ganga
Singh, however, it is important to note that his statements have
(2 of 4) [SOSA-676/2021]
been recorded by police after delay of many days from the
incident. It is also submitted that so far as the evidence of PW.3-
Kashmir Singh is concerned, he has specifically admitted in his
cross examination that he knew the appellant but in his police
statements, he has not disclosed the identity of the appellant.
Learned counsel has also submitted that recovery of ATM card,
axe and blood stained clothes of accused-appellant is also doubtful
as the witness PW.6-Udaybhan is near relative of the deceased.
Learned counsel has further submitted that the accused-appellant
is in jail from last more than eight years and there is no possibility
of hearing of this appeal in near future, therefore, the sentence
awarded to him by learned trial Court may kindly be suspended.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for
suspension of sentence.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
It is true that the case of prosecution is based on
circumstantial evidence only and accused-appellant is in jail from
last more than eight years. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of
Ashim @ Asim Kumar Haranath Bhattacharya @ Asim
Harinath Bhattacharya @ Aseem Kumar Bhattacharya Vs.
National Investigation Agency (Criminal Appeal
No.1525/2021) passed on 01.12.2021, has held:
"13. Deprivation of personal liberty without
ensuring speedy trial is not consistent with Article
21 of the Constitution of India. While deprivation of
personal liberty for some period may not be
avoidable, period of deprivation pending
trial/appeal cannot be unduly long. At the same
time, timely delivery of justice is part of human
rights and denial of speedy justice is a threat to
public confident in the administration of justice."
(3 of 4) [SOSA-676/2021]
In view of the above, taking into consideration the overall
facts and circumstance of the case, custody period of the accused-
appellant and the fact that hearing of the appeal will consume
time, we consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive
sentence awarded to the accused appellant.
Accordingly, S.B. Suspension of Sentence (Appeal)
No.676/2021 filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court
vide judgment dated 18.08.2021 in Session Case No.(CIS
No.938/2014) against appellant Gurucharan Singh @ Bhola S/o
Saudagar Singh, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the
aforesaid appeal, 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 10.01.2022 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 appellant 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,
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-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as
Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-
appellant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also
(4 of 4) [SOSA-676/2021]
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-appellant does not appear before the trial Court, the
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J
11-T.Singh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
