Rajaram S/O Ramnath @ Jagannath vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 6314 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Misc. Application (Suspension of Sentence)
                               No.1112/2022
                                        In

               S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1699/2022
1.     Rajaram S/o Ramnath @ Jagannath, Aged About 34
       Years, R/o Panchkuiya Darwaja Purani Tonk Dist. Tonk
       (Raj) (Accused Confined In Dist. Jail Tonk)
2.     Vinod S/o Gopilal, Aged About 51 Years, Civil Line, Tonk
       Dist. Tonk (Raj) (Accused Confined In Dist. Jail Tonk)
3.     Pappu @ Ramesh S/o Nandalal, Aged About 48 Years, R/o
       Begam       Bag    Bahir,     Tonk       Distt.     Tonk          (Raj)(Accused
       Confined In Dist. Jail Tonk)
4.     Sugan   S/o       Peeru     Lal,      Aged     About        47      Years,    R/o
       Panchkuiya        Darwaja       Purani       Tonk         Dist.    Tonk      (Raj)
       (Accused Confined In Dist. Jail Tonk)
                                                                         ----Appellants
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan
                                                                    ----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sandeep Jain, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Babu Lal Nasuna, Public Prosecutor

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA Order 22/09/2022 This application for suspension of sentence has been

preferred on behalf of the applicants/appellants under Section 389

of Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence awarded by the Court of

Sessions Judge, Tonk (Raj.) vide its judgment dated 25.08.2022 in

Sessions Case No.10/2018.

Learned counsel for the applicants/appellants submits

that the applicants were on bail during trial and they are behind

the bars since 25.08.2022. Learned counsel further submits that

(2 of 2) [1112SOSA2022 in CRLAS-1699/2022]

hearing of appeal will take a long time. Hence, sentence awarded

to the applicants/appellants may be suspended during pendency

of the appeal.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor appearing

for the State, has opposed the application for suspension of

sentence.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the

applicants/appellants as well as learned Public Prosecutor and

perused the material made available on record.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel

for the applicants/appellants and taking into consideration overall

facts and circumstances of the case; but without expressing any

opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, this Court deems

it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the

applicants/appellants.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence

is allowed and it is ordered that execution of the sentence

awarded by the trial Court to the applicants/appellants, namely

(1) Rajaram S/o Ramnath @ Jagannath, (2) Vinod S/o Gopilal, (3)

Pappu @ Ramesh S/o Nandalal and (4) Sugan S/o Peeru Lal shall

remain suspended during the pendency of appeal provided each of

them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with

two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of

the learned trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear

before this Court on 20.10.2022, thereafter, as and when called

upon to do so.

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J Ashish Kumar /68

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)