Lalaram vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 3844 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 6/2022

Lalaram S/o Shri Punaram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Kyarafali Mean Taleti, Police Station Abu Road Sadar, District Sirohi. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Jodhpur.)

----Petitioner Versus State, Through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Bijarnia.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Chhaparwal, PP.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

11/03/2022

The appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced as

below vide judgment dated 29.09.2021 passed by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Abu Road, District Sirohi in C.I.S.

Case No.02/2019 (CIS No.02/2019):

Offences            Sentences                     Fine
Section 302 IPC     Life Imprisonment.            Rs.10,000/- in default of
                                                  which to further undergo
                                                  6 Months R.I.

He has preferred the instant application for suspension of

sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C. craving suspension of

sentences and release on bail, during pendency of the appeal.

Learned counsel Shri Vikas Bijarnia, learned counsel

representing the appellant applicant, vehemently and fervently

(2 of 5) [SOSA-6/2022]

urged that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. The

prosecution has come out with a case that the appellant herein

inflicted a stone blow on the head of the victim Shri Rangaram and

thereby killed him on 24.11.2018. He pointed out that the FIR

came to be lodged after significant delay i.e. on 25.11.2018 at

11.30 am. nearly more than 12 hours after the incident. He urged

that the two star prosecution witnesses Smt. PW-1 Sonki wife of

the deceased and PW-8 Shri Tripal Singh @ Deepak son of the

deceased gave highly contradictory versions regarding the

incident. He further urged that the conduct of these witnesses is

absolutely unnatural. They took no step whatsoever to take the

victim to the hospital after he allegedly received injuries at the

hands of the accused. He drew the Court's attention to the

statement of Tripal Singh wherein, he admitted that after the

assault allegedly made by the appellant on the head of Shri

Rangaram by a stone, his father walked back on his own and went

to sleep on a cot. Thereafter, he expired. Shri Bijarnia submitted

that had there been an iota of truth in the prosecution story, there

was no rhyme or reason behind this sequence of events and in

natural course, the family members would have taken the injured

to the hospital. He further submitted that Sonki (PW-1) stated

that incident took place in front of their house whereas Shri Tripal

Singh (PW-8) stated that incident took place behind their house.

Thus, there is a serious discrepancy regarding the place of

incident in the statement of two so-called eye-witnesses. On these

grounds, Shri Bijarnia implored the Court to accept the application

for suspension of sentences and direct release of the appellant on

bail, during pendency of the appeal.

(3 of 5) [SOSA-6/2022]

Learned Public Prosecutor has filed reply to the application

for suspension of sentences. He opposed the submissions

advanced by Shri Bijarnia and urged that the two eye witnesses,

referred to supra, have clearly alleged that the appellant called the

deceased out of his house and gave a blow of stone which was

lying nearby. The deceased fell down at the spot and expired

because of the stone injury. He thus urged that the appellant does

not deserve indulgence of bail.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the

submissions advanced at bar and, have gone through the

impugned Judgment and the material available on record.

First and foremost, it may be noted here that as per the

statements of the two eye-witnesses Sonki (PW-1) and Tripal

Singh @ Deepak (PW-8), there was no prior enmity between the

accused and the deceased. On the fateful day, the accused, who is

a cousin of Shri Tripal Singh, came to their house and was raising

a ruckus on the issue as to why the goat had been sacrificed in his

absence. Saying so, the accused picked up a stone lying nearby

and gave a blow thereof on the head of the deceased. Shri Tripal

Singh (PW-8) stated that after receiving the injury, his father

walked back on his own and went to sleep on the cot. None of the

family members made any effort whatsoever to take Shri

Rangaram to the hospital for treatment. There is a discrepancy

regarding the place of incident when the statements of PW-1

Sonki and PW-8 Tripal Singh are seen.

In this background, we are of the opinion that the appellant

applicant has available to him strong and plausible grounds so as

to assail the impugned Judgment. Hearing of the appeal is unlikely

in near future.

(4 of 5) [SOSA-6/2022]

In this view of the matter and, having regard to the facts

and circumstance 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 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 No.1, Abu Road, District Sirohi, vide judgment dated

29.09.2021 in Sessions Case No.02/2019 (CIS No.02/2019)

against the appellant-applicant Lalaram, 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 11.04.2022 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.

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

(5 of 5) [SOSA-6/2022]

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-Tikam/-









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)