Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bhoornath vs State on 21 April, 2023
Bench: Arun Bhansali, Rajendra Prakash Soni
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1182/2022.
IN
D.B. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 176/2022.
Bhoornath Son of Chyananath, aged about 25 years, resident of
Sarayan, Pali Police Station Taranagar, District Churu (Raj.).
(The appellant/convict presently lodged at the Central Jail
Bikaner).
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan through PP at Jodhpur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Choudhary.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Chhaparwal, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI
Order
21/04/2023
1. The appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced as
below vide judgment dated 26.08.2022 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge Judge, Taranagar (Churu), in Session
Case No. 1/2017:
Offences Sentence Fine
302 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.50,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo
three years additional
imprisonment
325 IPC 7 Years simple Rs.10,000/- and in default of
imprisonment which to further undergo one
year additional imprisonment
(2 of 4) [SOSA-1182/2022]
2. The appellant-applicant has preferred the application for
suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for release on
bail during the pendency of the appeal.
3. Leaned counsel for the appellant-applicant submitted that
the appellant has been convicted purportedly on circumstantial
evidence, which is absolutely not present in the present case. The
only evidence used against the appellant is the oral evidence of
father of the deceased that he heard on speaker of his son's phone
wherein, the accused called him. Besides it, there is no evidence
connecting the appellant to the offences.
4. Further submissions have been made that two witnesses of
the last scene, namely, PW-8 Mahendra Nath and PW-9 Banwari
Nath have turned hostile and in that view of the matter, the
appellant could not have been convicted. Besides it, it is further
urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that the co-accused
Mamta qua whom, the allegations of extra marital relations with
the accused were made, has been acquitted by the trial court. The
appellant is in custody for over six and half years and the hearing
of the appeal will take a long time. Therefore, in these
circumstances, the sentences awarded to the appellant may be
suspended during the pendency of the appeal.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for
suspension of sentence.
6. Having considered the totality of the facts and circumstances
of the case and after carefully scrutinizing the record of the case,
without making any observations on merits of the case, we are
inclined to suspend the substantive sentence of the appellant-
(3 of 4) [SOSA-1182/2022]
applicant, namely, Bhoornath S/o Chyananath during the
pendency of the appeal.
7. Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of
sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
ordered that substantive sentence passed by the Additional
Sessions Judge, Taranagar (Churu) in Session Case No.1/2017
against the appellant-applicant, namely, Bhoornath S/o
Chyananath, 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/- each with two
sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial
Judge for his appearance in this court on 23.05.2023 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.
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.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s)
they will give in writing their changed address to the
trial court.
8. 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 relating to original case in which the accused-
applicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also
be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall
(4 of 4) [SOSA-1182/2022]
not been taken into account for statistical purpose relating to
pendency and disposal of the cases in the trial court. In case the
said accused-applicant does not appear before the trial court,
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.
(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J (ARUN BHANSALI),J
24-Mohan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
