Girvar Singh vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6900 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:28369-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 363/2023 IN D.B. Criminal Appeal No.67/2023

1. Girvar Singh S/o Sh. Kesar Singh, Aged About 34 Years,

2. Sher Singh S/o Sh. Kesar Singh, Aged About 37 Years, Both resident of Kitawato Ka Was, Ogana, Dist. Udaipur. (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur).

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

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Shrimali For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Chhaparwal, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI

Order

06/09/2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for

suspension of sentence.

2. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

preferred by the appellant-applicants, who have been convicted

and sentenced by the learned trial court vide judgment dated

31.03.2023 in Sessions Case No.01/2022. The appellant-

applicants have been sentenced as under :-

Offence U/s     Sentence               Fine                 Sentence in default of
                                                            payment of fine
302/34 IPC      Life                   Rs.10,000/- Five months'
                imprisonment                       additional S.I.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicants has argued that

[2023:RJ-JD:28369-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-363/2023]

the trial court has grossly erred in sentencing and convicting the

appellant-applicants vide impugned judgment for the offence

under Section 302/34 IPC. It is further submitted that the

prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt

that the appellant-applicants had committed murder of the

deceased. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicants while

inviting our attention towards the statement of PW-1 Ganga Bai

and PW-2 Lahar Singh has argued that from the evidence of above

mentioned prosecution witnesses, it is clear that both of them

were not with the deceased Sardar Singh when the alleged

incident took place. Learned counsel has also submitted that PW-1

Ganga Bai in her police statement has clearly stated that her

husband and son Lahar Singh accompanied Bhopa Ji when he was

returning to his house, however, in the court statement, she has

falsely stated that she also accompanied them. It is submitted

that PW-2 Lahar Singh, in his police and court statements has

stated that he went to the house of Bhopa Ji along with his father

but stayed there in the night whereas his father alone returned to

the house.

4. Learned counsel has further submitted that from the above

piece of evidence, it is clear that PW-1 and PW-2 had not

accompanied deceased Sardar Singh when he was returning from

the house of Bhopa Ji. It is further submitted that from the

statement of Investigating Officer PW-21 - Prabhu Lal, it is clear

that on the shirt and t-shirt, recovered at the instance of the

appellant-applicants, no blood stains were found. It is also

submitted that the sticks (lathi) recovered at the instance of the

[2023:RJ-JD:28369-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-363/2023]

appellant-applicants were also not stained with blood.

5. Learned counsel, therefore, submitted that the prosecution

has failed to prove the charge levelled against the appellant-

applicants for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC, however, the

learned trial court without taking into consideration the evidence

produced on behalf of the prosecution in right perspective has

illegally convicted and sentenced the appellant-applicants.

6. It is also submitted that the appellant-applicants are in

custody since 03.10.2021 and as hearing of the appeal is likely to

take time, the sentence awarded to the appellant-applicants may

be suspended.

7. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this application for

suspension of sentence.

8. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances

of the case and without making any observation on the merits of

the case, we are inclined to suspend the sentence awarded to the

appellant-applicants.

9. Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence filed

under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, No.4, Udaipur

vide judgment dated 31.03.2023 in Sessions Case No.01/2022

against appellant-applicants Girvar Singh s/o Shri Kesar Singh

& Sher Singh s/o Shri Kesar Singh shall remain suspended till

final disposal of the appeal, provided they execute personal bond

in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.25,000/-

each to the satisfaction of the learned trial judge for their

[2023:RJ-JD:28369-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-363/2023]

appearance in this court on 06.10.2023 and whenever ordered to

do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated

below:-

1. That they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the appellants change the place of residence, they will give in writing 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, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

10. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of

the accused-appellants in a separate file. Such file be registered

as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the

accused-appellants 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

to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the

said accused-appellants do not appear before the trial court, the

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

cancellation of bail.

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J

80-Payal/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)