Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Vrijesh Narayan Shukla @ Vrijesh ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 2 September, 2023
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati, Kuldeep Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc 4th Suspension Of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 884/2021
In
D.B. Criminal Appeal No.612/2017
Vrijesh Narayan Shukla @ Vrijesh Das S/o Sh. Rampal Shukla,
Aged About 69 Years, B/c Brahmin R/o Malava Chahajaipur, P.s.
Baghray, Teh. Kunda Dist. Pratapgarh (U.p) At Present Chak
Daudnagar, Naini Allahabad (U.p.). (Presently Lodged At Central
Jail, Jodhpur).
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dudh Nath Yadav
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Joshi, GA cum AAG assisted
by Mr. Rajat Chhaparwal, AAAG.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
02/09/2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on D.B. Criminal
Misc. 4th (Suspension of Sentence) Application
No.884/2021.
2. Mr. D.N. Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant fairly
submits that the earlier suspension of sentence of the accused-
appellant bearing D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence
(Appeal) No.1185/2017 was rejected on 05.07.2018 and, while
recording the merits of the case, this Court had passed the
following order:
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Public
Prosecutor for the State. Perused the record.
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 05:22:21 AM)
(2 of 4) [SOSA-884/2021]
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that
there is no direct evidence against the applicant and his
conviction is based on circumstantial evidence. It is
submitted that the recovery of weapon of offence and blood
stained shirt of the applicant was made from an open place
after a period of 20 days. It is submitted that the vehicle
Bolera Camper was also recovered from an open place.
According to learned counsel, the chain of circumstances in
the present case is not indicative towards the guilt of the
accused and thus, the judgment under appeal passed by
the learned trial Judge convicting the applicant is not
sustainable in the eyes of law and therefore, appeal
preferred by the applicant is likely to succeed.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail
application.
Having considered the submissions and taking into
consideration totality of the facts and the circumstances of
the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence
awarded to the applicant.
Accordingly, the application preferred on behalf of the
applicant seeking suspension of sentence is rejected."
3. Mr. Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant without taking
us any further on merits except for what already indulged upon by
this Court before, makes four submissions before this Court.
3.1 First submission made by learned counsel for the appellant is
that the appellant is a 71 years old man.
3.2 The second submission made by learned counsel for the
appellant is that the appellant has undergone the custody of 11
years, 02 months & 08 days including remission and all other
benefits.
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 05:22:21 AM)
(3 of 4) [SOSA-884/2021]
3.3 The third submission made by learned counsel for appellant
is that the appellant has been ill and on taking the illness into
consideration, the appellant has been granted two paroles, one on
07.12.2020 and another on 17.07.2023, which he availed, while
abiding by all the necessary conditions.
3.4 The fourth submission made by learned counsel for the
appellant is that as per the police record, which is on record, the
appellant does not have any previous criminal antecedents.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that on such
submissions, the suspension of sentence application be allowed as
the final hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time.
5. Mr. Anil Joshi, learned Government Advocate cum Additional
Advocate General opposes the aforesaid submissions made on
behalf of the appellant.
6. This Court, on a conjoint consideration of the reasons given
particularly, the health condition of the appellant; the appellant is
71 years old man; the completion of parole, while abiding by all
the conditions; and the custody period of the appellant i.e. 11
years, 02 months & 08 days, deems it appropriate to suspend the
sentence of the appellant in this case, at this stage.
7 Accordingly, D.B. Criminal Misc. 4th (Suspension of
Sentence) Application No. 884/2021 filed under Sec.389
Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence
passed by the trial court vide judgment dated 10.03.2017 in
Sessions Case No.22/2016 (16/2015) against appellant Vrijesh
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 05:22:21 AM)
(4 of 4) [SOSA-884/2021]
Narayan Shukla @ Vrijesh Das S/o Sh. Rampal Shukla shall
remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal,
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
03.10.2023 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 months of January & July 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,
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-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 does not appear before the trial court, the
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.
(KULDEEP MATHUR), J. (DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
1-ZEESHAN
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
