Pradeep Kumar @ Pappu vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 2666 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2666 Raj
Judgement Date : 4 April, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Pradeep Kumar @ Pappu vs State Of Rajasthan on 4 April, 2023

Bench: Farjand Ali

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Application for Suspension Of Sentence

No. 82/2023 In

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 143/2023

Pradeep Kumar @ Pappu S/o Shanti Lal, Aged About 25 Years, Ajgariyapada, Kuwaniya, P.s. Bhungara, Dist. Banswara. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur).

                                                                    ----Appellant
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                  ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. Parikshit Nayak
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. A.R. Choudhary, P.P.



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                    Order

04/04/2023

The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated

21.01.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Banswara in Sessions Case No.143/2019 (CIS No.143/2019)

whereby he was convicted and sentenced to suffer maximum

imprisonment of seven years' rigorous imprisonment along with a

fine of Rs.25,000/- under Section 304 (B) of IPC and lesser

punishment for the other offence under Section 498A of IPC.

It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the learned

trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual

aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous

conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be

(2 of 4)

appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court.

Shri Parikshit Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant further submits that the ingredients, essential to

constitute an offence under Section 304-B of IPC are

conspicuously missing, as the prosecution has miserably failed to

establish the fact that soon before her death, the deceased was

subjected to maltreatment for or in connection of dowry. Simply

omnibus allegation of cruelty meted out to the deceased on

account of dowry has been mentioned in the FIR. Subsequent

thereto, a new story of demanding amount for paying installment

for the vehicle was set up. However, on both counts, the

prosecution failed to establish the fact beyond the reasonable

doubt that the deceased ended her life on account of cruelty

meted out to her in connection with demand of dowry. He further

submits that the material witnesses have not supported the

prosecution story rather turned hostile. The prosecution has been

launched with the dishonest intention owing to the said demise of

the young bride and the above fact can very well be elucidated

from the FIR wherein even an allegation of murdering the

deceased was made, however, after investigation, the theory of

killing her was not found proven. Hearing of the appeal is likely to

take long time, therefore, the application for suspension of

sentence may be granted.

Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicant for

releasing the appellant on application for suspension of sentence.

(3 of 4)

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the

parties and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of

the case, more particularly the fact that He is in imprisonment

from the date of arrest and hearing of appeal is likely to take

further more time and considering the overall submissions while

refraining from passing any comments on the niceties of the

matter and the defects of the prosecution as the same may put an

adverse effect on hearing of the appeal, this court is of the opinion

that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the

accused-appellant.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

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

sentence passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banswara

who passed the impugned order dated 21.01.2023 in Sessions

Case No. 143/2019 (CIS No.143/2019) against the appellant-

applicant- Pradeep Kumar @ Pappu S/o Shanti Lal 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 05.05.2023 and whenever ordered to do so till the

disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

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

(4 of 4)

2. That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.