Shambhu Giri vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 14281 Raj

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 14281 Raj
Judgement Date : 5 December, 2022

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Shambhu Giri vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 December, 2022

Bench: Farjand Ali

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1053/2022

S.B.Criminal Appeal No. 1629/2022

Shambhu Giri S/o Ramgiri @ Ramgiri Goswami, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Borda, Police Station Gangrar, District Chittorgarh (Raj.) (Lodged At Central Jail, Udaipur)

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

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhagat Dadhich For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

05/12/2022

Heard.

Admit.

Issue notice to the respondent. Learned Public Prosecutor accepts notice on behalf of State.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned public prosecutor on application of suspension of sentence.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that patently a

false case has been foisted against the accused-appellant with a

view to wreak vengeance upon him. The story as narrated by

prosecutrix Santosh is not reliable, as there is major discrepancy

and incongruancy in the statement recorded during the course of

the investigation and during trial. She is a grownup major lady

(2 of 3) [SOSA-1053/2022 in Cr.A-1629/22]

aged of 25 years and resides in the same vicinity where the

appellant resides. He further submits that the delay occurred in

lodging of the FIR has not been explained satisfactorily. Rather, no

explanation has been furnished. The excuses she taken of showing

her solitude at her home are conflicting whereas in the FIR she

states that at the time of incident her husband-Dalchand went to

take clothes at Gangrar on the other hand she, on her oath

statement explains that her husband went to do a job of colour

painting. The minor boy of the prosecutrix could have been a

material witness of the incident but he has been deliberately

withheld and not produced in the trial. He further submits that the

manner in which the incident alleged to have taken place does not

inspire confidence. He is behind the bars since last one year and

five months and hearing of the appeal may take a long time.

Applicant-appellant has a strong arguable case in his favour.

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the prayer

made by the learned counsel for the accused-appellant.

Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf

of the appellant and having regard to the facts and circumstances

of the case, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for

suspending the sentence awarded to the accused appellant.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentences passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge,

Chittorgarh, vide judgment dated 28.9.2022 in Sessions Case No.

48/2021 against the appellant-applicant Shambhu Giri S/o

Ramgiri @ Ramgiri Goswami shall remain suspended till final

disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail,

(3 of 3) [SOSA-1053/2022 in Cr.A-1629/22]

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 4.1.2023

and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on

the conditions indicated below:-

1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.