Sambhu Regar vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3477 Raj

(1 of 4) [SOSA-814/2021]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 814/2021

Sambhu Regar S/o Debi Regar, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Ratanpura, Mandalgarh, District Bhilwara. (At Present Lodged In District Jail Bhilwara)

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

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Shobha Prabhakar for Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gurjar For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Bhati, PP

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

07/03/2022

In wake of instant surge in COVID-19 cases and spread of its

highly infectious Omicron variant, abundant caution is being

maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of

all concerned.

Heard learned counsel for the parties on S.B. Criminal

Misc. (Suspension of Sentence) Application No.814/2021.

Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn the attention of

this Court towards the statement rendered by the prosecutrix,

who was examined as PW-1, has alleged that while her father-in-

law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law were all

sleeping in the same premises, her father-in-law committed rape

upon her.

(2 of 4) [SOSA-814/2021]

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there was a

matrimonial dispute as it was a "Aata-Sata" marriage, the

prosecutrix has also deposed that she did not make any hue and

cry as all the other family members were in the same premises in

the Chowk. Learned counsel further submits that the prosecutrix

has also emphasized on the fact that the clothes of her particularly

the Lehanga was washed by her twice after the incident before

being sent for Forensic Science Laboratory.

Learned counsel for the appellant has also drawn the

attention of this Court towards PW-6, who is the father of the

prosecutrix and who in his cross examination has admitted that

the daughter of the accused and the prosecutrix were exchanged

in "Aata Sata" marriage and there was a regular dispute as the

money was sought by the accused from the husband of the

prosecutrix.

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the FSL report

indicates the presence of semen, and thus, once there is an expert

report, there is no reason why the same should be disbelieved.

Learned Public Prosecutor further opposes the suspension of

sentence application upon the heinous offence having been

constituted.

In her rejoinder arguments, learned counsel for the appellant

has drawn the attention of this Court towards the Exhibit-1, which

is a FSL report, in which, though the semen has been detected but

at the same time for the blood groups and for the articles, 1(from-

A), 2(from-B), 7, 8 (from-1,2) and 6(from 1,2,3,4), the result

remain inconclusive.

(3 of 4) [SOSA-814/2021]

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant

has already been in custody from about last two years and eight

months.

This Court upon conjoint reading of the statement of the

prosecutrix alongwith the statement of her father PW-6 as well as

after examining the FSL report and also taking note of the fact

that the father-in-law accused had his daughter married to the

family of the prosecutrix and prosecutrix in "Aata Sata", which is

an exchanged marriage, are the fit facts for releasing the

appellant on suspension of sentence at this stage.

This Court also takes note of the fact that at the time of the

alleged incident, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law of

the prosecutrix were within the premises and no hue and cry or

any kind of alarm was raised.

Without observing anything further on merits, which would

prejudice the final adjudication of the appeal, the sentence is

suspended.

Accordingly, S.B. Criminal (Suspension of Sentence)

Application No. 814/2021 filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed

and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial

court vide judgment dated 15.07.2020 in Sessions Case

No.63/2019 against appellant Sambhu Regar S/o Debi Regar

shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal,

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 08.04.2022

and whenever ordered to do so, till the disposal of the appeal on

the conditions indicated below:-

(4 of 4) [SOSA-814/2021]

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 appellant 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,

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 does not appear before the trial court, the

learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for

cancellation of bail.

However, the discrepancy seen by this Court in the FSL

report ought to be addressed. Hence, the appeal bearing S.B.

Criminal Appeal No.845/2020 be listed for orders on 21.03.2022.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

76-Zeeshan

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)