Mangtu Ram vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 22 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B.Crl.Misc.2nd Suspension Of Sentence Appli. No. 1095/2022 in S.B.Criminal Appeal No.420/2021

Mangtu Ram S/o Sh. Om Prakash, Aged About 30 Years, R/o P.S. Srivijaynagar, Dist. Sriganganagar (Raj.).

(At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Sri Ganganagar).

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Ram Kumar Bohra, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Mukhtiyar Khan, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Order

02/01/2023

This is the second application under Section 389 Cr.P.C.

preferred by the appellant seeking suspension of his sentence. The

first SOS application of the appellant was dismissed by this Court

vide order dt. 27.10.2021 as not pressed with liberty to file a fresh

application after a period of one year.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that one year has

already passed after the rejection of first SOS application of the

appellant. It is contended that the prosecutrix was examined in

the court as PW-5 and there are material contradictions, omissions

and improvements in her statement. It is further contended that

the appellant has already served 6 years and 7 months of

imprisonment and hearing of the appeal is likely to take a long

(2 of 3) [SOSA-1095/2022]

time. In these circumstances, the sentence awarded to the

appellant may be suspended during the pendency of the appeal.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer

of the appellant but concurred the fact that till date, the appellant

has already undergone the sentence of 6 years and 7 months.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court

is of the opinion that the appeal preferred by the appellant against

the impugned judgment is not likely to be heard in near future

and as the appellant has already undergone more than 6 years

years of sentence, this application for suspension of sentence filed

by the appellant deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, this bail application under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is

allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by

the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court, POCSO Act Cases and

Commission for Child Rights Act, 2005 No.1, Sri Ganganagar vide

judgment dated 20.03.2021 in Sessions Case No.67/2018 against

accused-appellant Mangtu Ram S/o Sh. Om Prakash shall remain

suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal subject to

depositing the fine amount. The appellant shall be released on bail

provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-

with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the

learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 02.02.2023

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 appellant 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,

(3 of 3) [SOSA-1095/2022]

they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

4. The appellant shall deposit fine amount as imposed by the trial court.

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of

the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as

Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-

appellant was 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-appellant doesnot appear before the trial court, the

learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for

cancellation of bail.

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J 151-NK/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)