Ashok Kumar vs State
2021 Latest Caselaw 11111 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 168/2021

Ashok Kumar S/o Sh. Roopa, Aged About 20 Years, By Caste Dindor Adivasi, R/o Dhaidapada Delwara, P.s. Lohariya, District Banswara (Raj.). (Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur).

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


For Petitioner(s)         :      Mr. P.R. Mehta
For Respondent(s)         :      Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, AGC



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

                                     Order

19/07/2021

     Heard    learned    counsel        for    the     applicant-appellant       and

learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on

record.

The instant application for suspension of sentences has been

preferred on behalf of the appellant applicant who has been

convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated

27.01.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara in

Sessions Case No.110/2017 (CIS No.110/2017):

Offences                  Sentences             Fine              Fine      Default
                                                                  sentences
Section 302 IPC           Life                  Rs.10,000/- 1 Year's R.I.
                          Imprisonment
341 IPC                   1 Month's S.I. Rs.500/-                 4 Days' S.I.




                                         (2 of 3)                    [SOSA-168/2021]

Craving indulgence of bail for the appellant-applicant during

pendency of the appeal, learned counsel Shri Mehta vehemently

and fervently contended that the entire prosecution case is false

and fabricated. The appellant had no motive to murder his own

father Ashok. The testimony of the so called eye-witness Devilal is

unreliable because Devilal had a strong motive to falsely implicate

the appellant in this case. The material prosecution witnesses

Nathi (PW-8) and Munna (PW-10), who were originally portrayed

to be the eye-witnesses of the incident, did not support this

version. He further urged that though the prosecution has tried to

implicate the appellant on the basis of blood stained recoveries,

panch witnesses Ishanlal (PW-1) and Pyarelal (PW-2) did not

support the recoveries and were declared hostile. He further

submitted that the appellant had many opportunities to murder

his own father if he intended to do so and thus, it does not stand

to reason that the appellant would go to an extreme extent of

murdering his own father on the roadside. He thus urged that the

appellant-applicant deserves indulgence of bail during pendency of

the appeal.

Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, vehemently

and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the

appellant's counsel. He urged that the witness Devilal (PW-9) had

no occasion to falsely implicate the appellant. Drawing the Court's

attention to the cross-examination undertaken from Devilal,

learned Public Prosecutor urged that not even a semblance of

suggestion was given to Devilal regarding he carrying any ill-will

against the appellant herein. He further drew the Court's attention

to the FSL report (Ex.P/28) as per which, the blood smeared soil

(3 of 3) [SOSA-168/2021]

recovered from the spot and shirt, baniyan and pipe recovered at

the instance of the applicant appellant, all tested positive for

presence of 'B' group human blood. Learned Public Prosecutor

further urged that there is strong evidence, direct as well as

circumstantial, to connect the appellant with the crime and he

does not deserve indulgence of bail because he acted in an

extremely cruel manner by assaulting his own father who was

objecting the applicant-appellant for mortgaging the family

property.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the

submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the

impugned Judgment and the record.

Suffice it to say that at this stage, there exists strong

evidence in form of the ocular testimony of Devilal (PW-9) and the

circumstantial evidence in form of blood stained recoveries against

the appellant for connecting him with the murder of his own father

Shri Ashok. The witness Munna (PW-10) has deposed about the

grudge which the appellant bore against his father.

In this background, we are not inclined to grant indulgence

of bail to the applicant-appellant during pendency of the appeal.

Thus, the instant application for suspension of sentences is

rejected.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J

33-Tikam/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)