Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Tarshame Singh Shema vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 January, 2021
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 826/2020
Tarshame Singh @ Shema S/o Chota Singh @ Hartej Singh,
Aged About 38 Years, By Caste Jat Sikh, R/o Peerkamdiya Tibbi
Thana, Dist. Hanumangarh (At Present Lodge In Central Jail
Bikaner).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 793/2020
Ugrasen S/o Ramlal, Aged About 44 Years, By Caste- Jat,
Resident Of Peerkamdiya Tibbi Thana, Distt. Hanumangarh. (At
Present Lodged At Central Jail, Bikaner).
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ranjeet Joshi (on VC)
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP assisted by
Mr. Avinash Godara
Mr. N.R. Budania
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
15/01/2021
In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being
taken while hearing the matters in Court.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2 of 4) [SOSA-826/2020]
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that Mukhtiyar
Singh, Ram Lal, Ugrasen, Gursharan Singh, Tarshame Singh @
Shema, Hari Singh, Tarshame Singh, Jagga Singh, Mitthu Singh,
Resham Singh and Hartej Singh have been convicted under
Sections 148, 323, 324, 326/149 and 307/149 IPC. He further
submits that one accused Karandeep Singh @ Karan, who is the
main accused in the incident, has been convicted under Sections
148, 307, 326, 323 and 324 IPC. He also submits that out of the
previously named persons convicted alongwith the present
appellants, all have been released on bail except for Tarshame
Singh @ Shema and Ugrasen. He further submits that on the
same footing, this Hon'ble Court has suspended the sentence of all
the other accused except Karandeep Singh @ Karan, Tarshame
Singh @ Shema and Ugrasen.
Learned counsel for the appellants also submits that
Karandeep Singh @ Karan has a different case because he has
been convicted under Section 307 IPC whereas the appellants'
case is at par with the persons, who have been convicted under
Sections 307/149 IPC and sentence of all those persons has been
suspended.
Learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the
complainant vehemently oppose, while relying upon the statement
of injured witness.
Learned counsel for the complainant also submits that the
previous antecedents and the track record of the appellants
warrants that they remain in custody.
This Court takes note of the fact that the sentence of
Mukhtiyar Singh, Ram Lal, Gursharan Singh, Hari Singh, Tarshame
Singh, Jagga Singh, Mitthu Singh, Resham Singh and Hartej Singh
(3 of 4) [SOSA-826/2020]
has already been suspended by this Hon'ble Court and the
appellants' case is not different.
This Court, upon considering the submissions made by
learned counsel for the appellants, is inclined to suspend the
substantive sentence awarded to the accused-appellants.
Accordingly, S.B. Suspension of Sentence (Appeal)
No.826/2020 and 793/2020 filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. are
allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by
the trial court vide judgment dated 16.03.2020 in Sessions Case
No.31/2012 (CIS No.94/2014) against appellants (1) Tarshame
Singh @ Shema S/o Chota Singh @ Hartej Singh and (2)
Ugrasen S/o Ramlal shall remain suspended till final disposal of
the aforesaid appeal, provided each of them execute 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 16.02.2021 and whenever ordered to
do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated
below:-
1. That they will appear before the trial Court in the
month of January of every year till the appeal is
decided.
2. That if the appellants change the place of
residence, they will give in writing 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,
they will give in writing their changed address to
the trial Court.
(4 of 4) [SOSA-826/2020]
The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-appellants in a separate file. Such file be registered
as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the
accused-appellants 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-appellants do not appear before the trial court, the
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail. However, the appellants, on release, commit
any crime, the complainant shall be free to move cancellation of
suspension of sentence.
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
218-219/Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
