Ramesh Gurjar vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4423 Raj

[2023/RJJD/014413]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1223/2022

Ramesh Gurjar S/o Narayan Gurjar, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Gurjar Mohalla Senti Dist. Chittorgarh (At Present Confined In Dist. Jail Chittorgarh)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amitabh Acharya. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Joshi, GA-cum-AAG with Mr. Rajat Chhaparwal.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI Order 10/05/2023

1. This application for suspension of sentence under Section

389 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellant in relation to his

conviction by judgment dated 6.6.2022 passed by Additional

Sessions Judge No.2, Chittorgarh, in Sessions Case No.47/2020,

wherein, he has been found guilty of offences under Sections 302,

307, 436 and 451 IPC.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the

conviction of the appellant is based on the sole eye-witness PW/1

and the FSL report (Exhibit-19), does not support the case of the

prosecution that the deceased Pooja died on account of burn

injuries.

3. It was submitted that accused is aged 39 years and the

hearing of the appeal is likely to take sufficiently long time and,

therefore, his sentence may be suspended.

[2023/RJJD/014413] (2 of 2) [SOSA-1223/2022]

4. Learned AAG vehemently opposed the submissions. It was

submitted that the statements of PW/1 (eye-witness), who is also

injured, are trustworthy, nothing has been brought out in the

cross-examination so as to indicate any contradiction therein.

5. Further, the doctor PW/9 has specifically opined that the

injuries were outcome of petroleum product and, therefore, the

petitioner is not entitled to any indulgence.

6. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel

for the parties and having perused the record including the

statements as referred i.e. PW/1 and PW/9, we are not inclined to

grant suspension of sentence. The application for suspension of

sentence is, therefore, dismissed.

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J (ARUN BHANSALI),J 24-Sumit/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)