Smt. Sunnat Bano @ Bhanwari Devi vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 11700 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 588/2022

Smt. Sunnat Bano @ Bhanwari Devi W/o Babu Khan, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Kudi, Police Station Salasar, District Churu (Raj.) (At Present Lodged At Central Jail, Bikaner)

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

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Firoz Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Chhaparwal, P.P.

Mr. D.S. Gharsana

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

20/09/2022

The instant application for suspension of sentences

under Section 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the

appellant-applicant Smt. Sunnat Bano @ Bhanwari Devi W/o Babu

Khan, who has been convicted and sentenced as below vide the

judgment dated 17.06.2022 passed by the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Sujangarh, District Churu in Sessions Case

No.14/2014 :

Offence for Sentence, fine and default sentence which convicted awarded Section 302 IPC Life imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo simple imprisonment of three months Section 201 IPC Simple imprisonment of 7 years alongwith a fine of Rs.3000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo simple imprisonment of one month

(2 of 4) [SOSA-588/2022]

The appellant-applicant was arrested in this case on

13.06.2014 and since then she continues to be in custody.

Learned Public Prosecutor has filed reply to the

application for suspension of sentence, a perusal whereof reveals

that the appellant has undergone imprisonment of about 8 years

and 3 months.

We have heard and considered the submissions

advanced by learned counsel representing the appellant-applicant,

learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant

and have gone through the impugned judgment and the record.

The prosecution has come out with a case that the

deceased Sabeera Banu was married to Siraj Mohammed, son of

the appellant-applicant. When the first informant Ameen Khan

reached the place of incident, Babu Khan and his relatives

confessed that they had committed a mistake. It was also alleged

that the evidence of commission of offence was also destroyed by

the accused persons. As per the sworn testimony of the first

informant Ameen Khan (P.W.1), the allegation of the extrajudicial

confession is specifically against Babu Khan and vaguely against

the other relatives. The knife (weapon of offence) was recovered

in furtherance of a disclosure statement made by the accused

Babu Khan to the Investigating Officer under Section 27 of the

Evidence Act. It may be mentioned here that the trial court

acquitted the accused from the charge under Section 498-A of the

IPC.

We are of the view that there is merit in the contention

of the learned counsel for the appellant that the evidence against

the appellant would at best indicate that she was responsible for

(3 of 4) [SOSA-588/2022]

the offence of destruction of evidence, which is punishable under

Section 201 of the IPC and carries punishment of 7 years. The

appellant has already remained in custody for more than 8 years.

Hence, there are valid and justifiable grounds on record to

suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant during the

pendency of the appeal.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentences

filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentences passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Sujangarh, District Churu vide judgment dated 17.06.2022 in

Sessions Case No.14/2014 against the appellant-applicant Smt.

Sunnat Bano @ Bhanwari Devi W/o Babu Khan 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 21.10.2022 and whenever ordered to do so till the

disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1. That she will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant changes the place of residence, she 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(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 in a separate file. Such file be

registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which

the accused-applicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this

(4 of 4) [SOSA-588/2022]

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 does not appear before the trial

court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High

Court for cancellation of bail.

                                   (FARJAND ALI),J                                        (SANDEEP MEHTA),J


                                    19-Pramod/-









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)