Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sunil @ Sadhu vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 July, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
(1 of 3) [CRLAS-761/2022]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 761/2022
1. Sunil @ Sadhu S/o Sukhbir, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Ward No. 18 Near Sampat Dharamshala Bhattu Kallan
Dist. Fatehabad Haryana (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail
Rajgarh)
2. Rakesh Kumar @ Golu S/o Madan Lal, Aged About 27
Years, R/o Near High School Bhattu Kallan Dist.
Fatehabad Haryana (At Present Lodge In Sub Jail
Rajgarh)
3. Paramveer @ Pammi S/o Ishwar Singh, Aged About 28
Years, R/o Bhattu Kallan Dist. Fatehabad Haryana (At
Present Lodged In Sub Jail Rajgarh)
----Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. RS Choudhary.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
08/07/2022
Admit.
Issue notice.
Learned Public Prosecutor accepts notice on behalf of the
respondent-State.
Heard learned counsel for the parties on S.B. Suspension
of Sentence (Appeal) No.475/2022
Learned counsel for the appellants make a statement at Bar
that there are no previous criminal antecedents of the present
appellants. Learned counsel further submits that the appellants
(Downloaded on 12/07/2022 at 08:40:17 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLAS-761/2022]
are in custody since more than six years. Learned counsel also
submits that the identification parade was not carried out and
there is no injury to any one. Learned counsel further submits that
appellants were acquitted under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions.
This Court, looking into the record as well as the prolonged
custody period, is inclined to suspend the sentence awarded to the
present appellants.
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.475/2022 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 09.05.2022 in Special Sessions Case No.
39/2016 against appellants (1) Sunil @ Sadhu S/o Sukhbir,
(2) Rakesh Kumar @ Golu S/o Madan Lal and (3)
Paramveer @ Pammi S/o Ishwar Singh, shall remain
suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, provided each
of them executes 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 in this Court on 10.08.2022 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 appellants changes the place of
(Downloaded on 12/07/2022 at 08:40:17 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLAS-761/2022]
residence, they will give in writing 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,
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-appellants in a separate file. Such file be registered
as Criminal misc. Case related to original case in which the
accused-appellants 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 relating
to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the
said accused appellants 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.
174-Zeeshan/Jitender
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
