Lal Chand vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 6246 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 282/2022

In

D.B.Criminal Appeal No. 92/2019

Lal Chand S/o Bagdi Ram, Aged About 37 Years, B/c Gadari R/o Joravar Singh Ji Ki Khajuri Ps Mansa Dist. Nimach M.P. At Present Premnagar Dungla Dist. Chittorgarh (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Padam Singh Solanki For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R.Chhaparwal, P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

Order

27/04/2022

Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and

learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

The appellant has been convicted for the offence under

Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with

fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo

one month's simple imprisonment, vide judgment dated

21.2.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1,

Nimbahera Camp Badi Sadri, District Chittorgarh in Sessions Case

No. 62/2016.

Learned counsel Shri Solanki submits that there is no eye

witness of the incident. The accused himself received burn injuries

(2 of 2) [SOSA-282/2022]

while trying to save his wife deceased Smt. Sugna. Thus, he

craves indulgence of bail to the appellant during pendency of the

appeal.

Learned Public Prosecutor points out that the appellant

himself received burn injuries and thus, his presence in the house

at the time of incident is well established. The appellant did not

take any such plea in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that

he got the burn injuries while trying to save his wife. In this view

of the matter, learned Public Prosecutor submits that the

circumstances under which the deceased Smt. Sugna received

burn injuries have not been explained properly and accordingly,

the appellant has rightly been held guilty of the offence of murder.

He thus, craves dismissal of the application for suspension of

sentence.

Having given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions

advanced at the Bar and after going through the impugned

judgment, looking to the nature and gravity of the allegations

attributed to the appellant, we are not inclined to suspend the

sentences awarded to the appellant by the trial Court.

The application for suspension of sentence is therefore,

dismissed as being devoid of merit.

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J

51-RP/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)