Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jagdish vs State on 15 December, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc III Suspension Of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 625/2022
Jagdish S/o Laxmanram, Aged About 40 Years, B/c Prajapat, R/o
Atbada, P.S. Sojat City, Dist. Pali.
(Presently Lodged In Central Jail Jodhpur).
----Petitioner
Versus
State, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nishant Bora
Mr. Rakesh Gehlot
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Chhaperwal, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
15/12/2022
The instant application for suspension of sentences under
Section 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-
applicant Jagdish S/o Laxmanram, who has been convicted and
sentenced as below vide the judgment dated 03.12.2016 passed
by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sojat, District Pali in
Sessions Case No.12/2014:
Offences for Sentence, fine and default sentence
which convicted awarded
Section 302/149 Life imprisonment alongwith a fine of
IPC Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine,
further to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one
year.
Section 148 IPC Two years' rigorous imprisonment alongwith a
fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of
fine, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment
of one month.
(2 of 4) [SOSA-625/2022]
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently
The second application for suspension of sentences (D.B.
Criminal Misc. II SOS Application No.153/2019) filed on behalf of
the appellant was dismissed as withdrawn as per request of
learned counsel Shri Bora vide order dated 07.02.2019. The said
application was moved on behalf of the accused-appellant Jagdish
and the co-accused Ramesh. In the intervening period, the third
application for suspension of sentences filed on behalf of the co-
accused Ramesh was accepted by this Court vide order dated
07.07.2022.
Learned counsel Shri Bora submitted that the appellant was
arrested on 30.08.2014 and he continues to be in custody
thereafter. There are no criminal antecedents against the
appellant. The case of the prosecution against the appellant and
the co-convict Ramesh is exactly identical. The prosecution has led
circumstantial evidence in form of oral dying declaration only so as
to bring home the charges against the appellant. Shri Bora
submits that this circumstance was not proved by reliable
evidence. He urges that the appellant too deserves indulgence of
bail on parity.
Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently and fervently
opposed the submissions made by the counsel for the appellant.
Nonetheless, he is not in a position to dispute the fact that the
prosecution case which is primarily based on the oral dying
declaration made by Hanumanaram before the witnesses Bhera
Ram (P.W.6) and Bharat Kumar (P.W.16) was found to be having
certain infirmities and based on these observations, the
application for bail filed on behalf of co-accused Ramesh was
(3 of 4) [SOSA-625/2022]
accepted. In this background, the appellant too deserves same
indulgence on parity.
In this background and considering over all facts and
circumstances as available on record, we are inclined to suspend
the sentences awarded to him by the trial court.
Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentences filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentences passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sojat,
District Pali in Sessions Case No.12/2014 against the appellant-
applicant Jagdish S/o Laxmanram shall remain suspended till final
disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail,
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 20.01.2023
and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on
the conditions indicated below:-
1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the
month of January of every year till the appeal is
decided.
2. That if the applicant changes the place of
residence, he will give in writing his changed
address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel
in the High Court.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),
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-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as
Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-
applicant 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
(4 of 4) [SOSA-625/2022]
pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said
accused applicant does not appear before the trial court, the
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
5-SanjayS/Vivek/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
