Hariram vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 14850 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 627/2021

in

S.B.Criminal Appeal No. 262/2021

Hariram S/o Pukhraj, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Khetasar, Police Station Osiyan, Presently Kheme Ka Kua, Shobhawato Ki Dhani, Pal Road, Thana Housing Board, Jodhpur. (Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail, Rajsamand)

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

----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 262/2021 Hariram S/o Pukhraj, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Khetasar, Police Thana Osiyan Presently Khema Ka Kuan, Shobhawato Ki Dhani, Pal Road, Thana Housingh Board, Jodhpur. (Presently Lodged At District Jail, Rajsamand).

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. BR Godara For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

16/12/2022

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned public

prosecutor on application of suspension of sentence.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has

(2 of 4) [SOSA-627/2021]

falsely been implicated in this matter, he has nothing to do with

the alleged offence. The alleged recovery was not made from the

exclusive and conscious possession of him. There are several flaws

and latches in the case of the prosecution. The mandatory

provision has not complied with stricto-sensu. Learned counsel

drew attention towards the memo of recovery, as per which,

fifteen gunny bags were seized showing it to be a contraband.

When the contraband was brought before the trial court during the

examination of prosecution witness PW 14 Bheru Singh on

4.7.2016, the seized fifteen bags were not there instead of

twenty-two plastic bags were produced in the Court which were

having no seal impression or chit. It was explained before the trial

Court that since the gunny bags were in a dilapidated condition

and decayed owing to the lapse of time, therefore, the fifteen bags

of commodity were transferred into twenty two plastic bags. When

the inventory was made by the Judicial Magistrate on 18.11.2016,

subsequent to the production of contraband before the trial Court,

the Judicial Magistrate in report dated 18.11.2016 at para no.4

noticed the presence of fifteen gunny bags duly marked. Thus,

there is a serious discrepancy which goes to the root of the case

and casts a serious doubt in the story of the prosecution and

veracity of the statement of the prosecution witness. The

appellant is behind the bars since last three years and two months

and hearing of the appeal may take a long time.

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

(3 of 4) [SOSA-627/2021]

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 Sessions Judge, (Special Judge

NDPS Act Cases), Rajsamand, vide judgment dated 5.2.2021 in

Sessions Case No. 9/2010 against the appellant-applicant Hari

Ram S/o Pukh Raj 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 17.1.2023 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.

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(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered

as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the

accused-applicant(s) was/were 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

(4 of 4) [SOSA-627/2021]

relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In

case the said accused applicant(s) does not appear before the trial

court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High

Court for cancellation of bail.

(FARJAND ALI),J 139-140

Arti/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)