Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ghewarram vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 May, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Vinod Kumar Bharwani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 327/2022
Ghewarram S/o Chunaram, Aged About 32 Years, B/c Kumawat
R/o Bera Badala Nimaj Ps Jaitan Dist. Pali Raj. (Presently Is In
J.C. In Central Jail Jodhpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Girish Choudhary.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Chhaparwal, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Order
24/05/2022
The appellant applicant herein stands convicted and
sentenced as below vide judgment dated 21.02.2022 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bilara, District Jodhpur in
Sessions Case No.96/2020 (18/2012) CNR No.RJJR-13-000460-
2020:
Offences Sentences Fine Fine Default
Sentences
Section 450 IPC 10 Years' R.I. Rs.2,000/- 2 Month's
Additional
Imprisonment
Section 459 IPC 10 Years' R.I. Rs.2,000/- 2 Month's
Additional
Imprisonment
Section 460 IPC 10 Years' R.I. Rs.2,000/- 2 Month's
Additional
Imprisonment
(2 of 5) [SOSA-327/2022]
Section 394 IPC 10 Years' R.I. Rs.2,000/- 2 Month's
Additional
Imprisonment
Section 397 IPC 7 Years'
Imprisonment
Section 323/34 1 Year's R.I. Rs.500/- 15 Days'
IPC Additional
Imprisonment
Section 324/34 3 Years' R.I. Rs.1,000/- 1 Month's
IPC Additional
Imprisonment
Section 325/34 7 Years' R.I. Rs.1500/- 45 Days'
IPC Additional
Imprisonment
Section 307/34 10 Years' R.I. Rs.2,000/- 2 Month's
IPC Additional
Imprisonment
Section 302/34 Life Imprisonment Rs.5,000/- 6 Month's
IPC Additional
Imprisonment
All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
The instant application for suspension of sentences under
Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant
appellant seeking release on bail during pendency of the appeal.
We have heard learned counsel representing the applicant
appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the
impugned Judgment and the material available on record.
Learned counsel Shri Girish Choudhary representing the
appellant, vehemently and fervently urged that there is hardly any
evidence worth the name of the record so as to connect the
appellant with the crime. The incident involves house breaking by
the night, dacoity and triple murder in the house of Shri Mangla
Ram Dewasi at the Village Baag Ki Dhani, Bilara which took place
in the night intervening 13/14.01.2012. Smt. Dhagli and Dariyav
survived the assault whereas Dakhu Devi, Sangeeta and Ratna
Ram lost their lives. Sangeeta before she expired identified one of
(3 of 5) [SOSA-327/2022]
the assailants namely Salim. However, she did not identify the
appellant herein. The appellant has been convicted in this case
merely on the basis of recovery of his blood stained clothes. Shri
Choudhary urged that the recovery was effect after significant
delay and thus, it is unbelievable that the appellant would have
preserved the worthless incriminating articles for the same to be
recovered by the police at a later stage. On these grounds, Shri
Girish Choudhary implored the Court to accept the application for
suspension of sentences and direct enlargement of the appellant
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
have any criminal antecedents. He has suffered imprisonment of
nearly 10 years and 2 months without remission as on date.
As per the prosecution allegations, three unknown assailants
committed house breaking by the night in the house of Mangla
Ram in the night of 14.01.2012 with the intention of committing
dacoity and during this process, they assaulted the inmates Smt.
Dhagli, Dakhu Devi, Dariyav Devi, Ratna Ram and Sangeeta and
looted the valuable articles, ornaments, etc. and a Tavera Car
No.RJ-19-UA-5033. Dakhu, Ratna Ram and Sangeeta expired as a
result of the injuries received in the assault whereas Dhagli Devi
and Dariyav Devi were injured. The prosecution has tried to
portray that the faces of the assailants were covered by clothes.
However, during the assault, the cloth covering the face of one of
the assailants slipped and the deceased Sangeeta identified him to
be Salim who blurted out the names of the two other assailants.
However, the witness Dariyav (PW-17) could only identify the
(4 of 5) [SOSA-327/2022]
accused Salim in her evidence whereas Dhagli Devi (PW-18) could
not identify any of the assailants.
The case of the prosecution as against the appellant is thus
based totally on recovery of the blood stained shirt and the
number plate of the Tavera Vehicle. Whether or not, these
recoveries would be finally considered constituting proper
evidence so as to affirm the conviction of the appellant applicant
Ghewar Ram, would be for the Court to contemplate when the
appeal is being finally decided. However, for the present, we are
duly satisfied that the appellant has significant grounds to assault
the impugned Judgment. He has suffered more than 10 years
imprisonment without there being any possibility of an early
hearing of the appeal. The appellant does not have any criminal
antecedent as per the reply filed by the learned Public Prosecutor.
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, Bilara, District Jodhpur, vide judgment dated 21.02.2022
in Sessions Case No.96/2020 (18/2012) CNR No.RJJR-13-000460-
2020 against the appellant-applicant Ghewarram S/o
Chunaram, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the
aforesaid appeal and she shall be released on bail, provided she
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 her appearance in this court on 27.06.2022 and
(5 of 5) [SOSA-327/2022]
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
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.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
49-Tikam/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
