Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sunita vs State on 21 April, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLAS-394/2022]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 394/2022
Smt. Sunita D/o Poona Ram Bishnoi W/o Mahipal, Aged About 29
Years, R/o Village Khara, Teh. Phalodi, Dist. Jodhpur At Present
Patwari, Patwar Mandal Mandalakalan, Teh. Lohawat, Dist.
Jodhpur. (Lodged In Central Jail, Jodhpur).
----Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. C.S. Kotwani, with
Ms. Swati Shekhar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
21/04/2022
In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its
highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being
maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of
all concerned.
Admit.
Issue notice.
Learned Public Prosecutor already appearing on behalf of
respondent-State. Hence, notice need not be issued.
Heard learned counsel for the parties on S.B. Suspension
of Sentence (Appeal) No.298/2022.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant
was on bail during trial. Learned counsel further submits that the
sentence awarded to the appellant is of four years. Learned
(Downloaded on 21/04/2022 at 08:25:46 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLAS-394/2022]
counsel also submits that the appellant has an infant child aged
2½ years.
Learned counsel further submits that on conjoint reading of
the statements rendered by the complainant PW-17 and the
investigating officer PW-18, the demand on the part of the
appellant is not proved.
Learned Public Prosecutor has shown the transcript of
demand in Para No.40 of the impugned judgment and submits
that on conjoint reading of the transcript as well as the recovery,
the demand and the recovery both are made out.
This Court, while not entering into the merits of the case, as
well as taking into consideration the fact that the appellant is a
lady and there is a 2½ years old child, as also the fact that the
appellant was on bail during trial, is inclined to suspend the
substantive sentence awarded to the accused-appellant.
Accordingly, S.B. Criminal (Suspension of Sentence)
Application No. 298/2022 filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed
and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by learned
trial court vide judgment dated 08.04.2022 in Criminal Case
No.31/2015 against appellant- Smt. Sunita D/o Poona Ram
Bishnoi W/o Mahipal shall remain suspended till final disposal of
the aforesaid appeal, provided she 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 her appearance in
this Court on 23.05.2022 and whenever ordered to do so, till the
disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
1. That she will appear before the trial Court in the
month of January of every year till the appeal is
decided.
(Downloaded on 21/04/2022 at 08:25:46 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLAS-394/2022]
2. That if the appellant changes the place of
residence, she will give in writing her 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
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.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
9-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
