Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Hanuman vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 March, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Rekha Borana
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Second Suspension Of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 100/2022
Hanuman S/o Manphool Ram, Aged About 42 Years, I.T.I.
Colony, Hanumangarh Junction, Hanumangarh.
(At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Sri Ganganagar).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Kuber Choudhary for
Mr. S. K. Verma.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. B. R. Vishnoi, AGC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
08/03/2022
This is a second application for suspension of sentences
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of appellant Hanuman.
Previously, the appellant had been granted bail by this Court vide
order dated 04.07.2002 passed in D.B. Criminal Bail Application
No. 122/2002. However, the appellant failed to remain present
before the trial Court and intimation was forwarded to this Court
and accordingly, he was summoned through a warrant of arrest by
order dated 06.03.2020, which has been executed on 16.11.2021.
Since, then the appellant is lodged in custody. Now, this second
application for suspension of sentences has been filed on his
behalf.
Learned counsel Ms. Choudhary submits that there was no
direction to require presence of the accused- appellant in the trial
(2 of 3) [SOSA-100/2022]
Court as per the order of suspension of sentences dated
04.07.2002. Only one criminal case has been registered against
the appellant during the intervening period and therein also, the
appellant has been involved merely on the basis of suspicion. She
therefore urges that the appellant deserves one more opportunity
of bail during pendency of appeal.
Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently and fervently
opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's counsel and
sought dismissal of the application.
In this view of the prevailing facts and circumstances as
available on record, we deem it just and proper to suspend the
sentences awarded to the appellant applicant, during pendency of
the appeal.
Accordingly, the instant second application for
suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is
allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the
District & Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh, vide judgment dated
16.01.2002 in Sessions Case No.61/2000 against the appellant-
applicant Hanuman, 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 04.04.2022 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.
(3 of 3) [SOSA-100/2022]
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
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.
(REKHA BORANA),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
50-Dharmendra/- Sachin/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
