Rajasthan High Court
Jeevram @ Jeevraj Son Of Biram vs State Of Rajasthan on 17 January, 2023
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.
1329/2022
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 2039/2022
1. Jeevram @ Jeevraj Son Of Biram, Resident Of 756,
Ganesh Nagar, Police Station R.k. Puram Kota City
2. Jasraj Son Of Biram, Resident Of Poonya Devri, Police
Station Anantpura Kota City
3. Kanhaiya Son Of Biram, Resident Of Poonya Devri, Police
Station Anantpura, Kota City
4. Sonu Son Of Biram, Resident Of 746, Ganesh Nagar,
Police Station R.k. Puram Kota City
5. Pappu Son Of Shrawan, Resident Of 150, Ajay Ahuja
Nagar, Police Station Anantpura, Kota
----Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ahvin Garg
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Saini, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
17/01/2023
Heard learned counsel for the accused appellants and
learned Public Prosecutor on the application for suspension of
sentence and perused the judgment impugned dated 14.09.2022
passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.5, Kota whereby
the accused appellants have been convicted for the offence
punishable under sections 148, 452, 323/149, 307/149 and
325/149 IPC and has been sentenced to maximum ten years
(2 of 4) [SOSA-1329/2022]
simple imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default to
further undergo SI for two months.
Learned counsel for the accused-appellants submits that
there is a cross case where case was lodged by Kailashi Devi, the
wife of the appellant No.2 in which charge-sheet was submitted
and the matter is pending trial. There was no premeditation to kill
the victim rather the incident occurred in a spur of moment after
exchange of hot altercation and the fact is admitted by PW-13,
Investigating Officer who conducted the investigation. PW-8 Satu
made omnibus allegations of inflicting injuries. PW-10 Dr. Vinod
Garg observed injuries on victim Deva. The first was bruise on left
leg and the second was a stitched wound on the parietal region of
the skull for which after treatment, medical opinion of injury was
given as dangerous to life. In this regard, it is submitted that at
the first instance, the Medical Officer has not observed injury as
dangerous to life and the opinion in this regard was given after 18
days without physically examining the victim rather solely on the
basis of treatment record. No discharge ticket is available on
record.
Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the prayer
made by learned counsel for the accused-appellant.
The accused-appellants are behind the bars and the hearing
of appeal is likely to take further more time, therefore, considering
the overall submissions and looking to the totality of facts and
circumstances of the case 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 appellants.
(3 of 4) [SOSA-1329/2022]
Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentences passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.5,
Kota, vide judgment dated 14.09.2022 in Sessions Case CIS No.
219/2016 against the appellant-applicants Jeevram @ Jeevraj Son
Of Biram, Jasraj Son Of Biram, Kanhaiya Son Of Biram, Sonu Son
Of Biram and Pappu Son Of Shrawan shall remain suspended till
final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on
bail provided each of them 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 their appearance in this
court on 20.02.2023 and whenever ordered to do so till the
disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial
Court in the month of January of every year till the
appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of
residence, he/she/they will give in writing
his/her/their 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(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered
as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the
accused-applicants were 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
(4 of 4) [SOSA-1329/2022]
to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the
said accused applicants 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
PREETI VALECHA /55
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
