Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sohan vs State Of Rajasthan on 4 July, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 566/2022
1. Sohan S/o Vithala, Aged About 26 Years, Ganauwa
Majara, Badapada, Police Thana Sadar, Banswara, Dist.
Banswara. (Lodged At Dist. Jail, Banswara).
2. Pappu @ Pradeep S/o Prabhu, Aged About 26 Years, B/c
Charpota Adavasi, R/o Ganauwa Majara, Badapada, Police
Thana Sadar, Banswara, Dist. Banswara. (Lodged At Dist.
Jail, Banswara).
3. Babulal S/o Vithala, Aged About 30 Years, B/c Ninama, R/
o Toraniya, Police Thana Sadar, Banswara, Dist.
Banswara. (Lodged At Dist. Jail, Banswara).
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. RS Bhati
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Sharma, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
04/07/2022
Admit.
Issue notice.
Learned Public Prosecutor accepts notice on behalf of the
State. Hence, notice need not be issued.
Heard learned counsel for the parties on S.B. Suspension
of Sentence (Appeal) No.566/2022.
Counsel for the appellant submits that the allegation against
present appellants are that they entered in the house of the
complainant at about 1:00 in night and overturn filled drums and
(Downloaded on 04/07/2022 at 08:55:18 PM)
(2 of 3) [SOSA-566/2022]
also dug some corners of house and took away mobile and some
silver articles and also Rs.250/- from the purse. It is also alleged
that they also took the axe from the house and while they leaving,
they threatened the family members.
Counsel further submits that all the appellants have
undergone sentence of about one year. Learned counsel also
submits that the trial is likely to take some long time.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the suspension of
sentence application.
Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of
the case, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the
substantive sentence awarded to the accused appellants.
Accordingly, S.B. Suspension of Sentence (Appeal)
No.566/2022 filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court
vide judgment dated 05.10.2021 in Session Case No.25/2015 (CIS
No.25/2015) against appellants (1) Sohan S/o Vithala, (2)
Pappu @ Pradeep S/o Prabhu and (3) Babulal S/o Vithala
shall remain suspended till final disposal of aforesaid appeal,
provided each of them execute a personal bond in a sum of
Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the
satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before
this Court on 16.08.2022 and whenever ordered to do so, till the
disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
1. That they will appear before the trial Court in the
month of January of every year till the appeal is
decided.
2. That if the appellant(s) changes the place of
residence, they will give in writing their changed
address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel
in the High Court.
(Downloaded on 04/07/2022 at 08:55:18 PM)
(3 of 3) [SOSA-566/2022]
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 do 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.
163-Sanjay/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
