Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Pratapram vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 July, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Kuldeep Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 277/2022
Pratapram S/o Shri Bhuraram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Panchla
Khurd, Police Station Osiyan, District Jodhpur. (Presently Lodged
In Central Jail, Jodhpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Arora.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, AGC.
Mr. Tarun Dhaka.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
15/07/2022
The appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced as
below vide judgment dated 14.02.2022 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Jodhpur District in Sessions Case
No.05/2020 (CIS No.83/2019):
Offences Sentences Fine
Section 302/34 Life Imprisonment. Rs.5,000/- in default of
IPC which to further undergo
3 Months' S.I.
The instant application for suspension of sentences has been
moved on behalf of the appellant under Section 389 Cr.P.C. with a
prayer to release him on bail, during pendency of the appeal.
Learned Public Prosecutor has filed reply to the application
for suspension of sentences as per which, the appellant does not
(2 of 4) [SOSA-277/2022]
have criminal antecedents. He has suffered custodial period of
more than 3 years.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the
submissions advanced at bar and, have gone through the material
available on record.
A perusal of the impugned Judgment and the record reveals
that the prosecution case pertaining to the allegation of murder of
Devaram is based on circumstantial evidence plain and simple.
Though, as per the FIR (Ex.P/1), two persons named Naina Ram
and Deeparam had seen Devaram and an unidentified man
proceeding on a motorcycle but neither of these persons were
examined at the trial. A perusal and re-appraisal of the judgment
rendered by the trial court and the evidence available on record,
convinces us that the findings recorded by the trial court in the
impugned Judgment for holding the appellant guilty of the
offences are sheerly conjectural and based on whims and fancies.
Even the FSL Report (Ex.P/39) does not implicate the accused
because blood group of the deceased could not be ascertained
when serological comparison was done.
In this background, we are of the view that the appellant-
applicant has available to him strong and plausible grounds for
assailing the impugned Judgment. Hearing of the appeal is
unlikely in the near future. The appellant has remained in custody
for more than 3 years.
In this view of the matter and, having regard to the facts
and circumstance as available on record, but without making any
comment on the merits of the case, we are inclined to enlarge the
(3 of 4) [SOSA-277/2022]
appellant on bail while suspending the sentences awarded to him
by the trial court, during pendency of the appeal.
Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of
sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
ordered that the sentences passed by the Additional Sessions
Judge, Jodhpur, vide judgment dated 14.02.2022 in Sessions Case
No.05/2020 (CIS No.83/2019) against the appellant-applicant
Pratapram, 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 16.08.2022 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
relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In
(4 of 4) [SOSA-277/2022]
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.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
18-Tikam/Prashant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
