Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nemi Chand vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 14 September, 2023
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi, Rajendra Prakash Soni
[2023:RJ-JD:29635-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR.
....
D.B. Criminal Misc. Second Suspension of Sentence
Application (Appeal) No. 1134/2023.
IN
D.B. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 225/2019.
Nemi Chand S/o Shri Uda Ram, by caste Garg, aged 40 years,
R/o Janglu Police Station Panchu, District Bikaner.
(Presently lodged in Central Jail, Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramavatar Singh Choudhary.
Mr. Sumer Singh Gour.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI
Order
14/09/2023
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-applicant, who has been convicted and
sentenced by the learned trial court vide judgment dated
01.06.2019 in Sessions Case No. 56/2013. The appellant-applicant
has been sentenced as under :-
[2023:RJ-JD:29635-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1134/2023]
Offence U/s Sentence Fine Sentence in default
of payment of fine
302 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.50,000/- Six months SI
323 IPC One Year SI Rs.1,000/- One month SI
Both the sentences shall run concurrently.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has argued that
the learned Trial Court has grossly erred in sentencing and con-
victing the appellant-applicant vide impugned judgment. Learned
counsel has submitted that though the allegation of inflicting fatal
injury is on the appellant but as a matter of fact, the incident took
place at a spur of moment while cultivating the agricultural field. It
is also submitted that the appellant-applicant is in custody for last
more than 10 years and the hearing of the appeal is likely to take
time.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has placed
reliance on the decisions of Hon'ble the Supreme Court dated
15.09.2022 in Sonadhar v. The State of Chhattisgarh : SLP (Crl.)
No.529/2021 and the Order dated 05.10.2021 in Saudan Singh v.
The State of Uttar Pradesh : SLP (Crl.) No.4633/2021 and thus, it
has been prayed that the sentence of the appellant-applicant may
be suspended during the pendency of the appeal aforesaid.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor has argued that the first
application for suspension of sentence (No. 588/2020) preferred
on behalf of the appellant-applicant was dismissed by the
co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 15.01.2021 while observing
that the appellant-applicant does not deserve indulgence of bail
[2023:RJ-JD:29635-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1134/2023]
during pendency of appeal. Learned Public Prosecutor has,
therefore, opposed the application for suspension of sentence.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after
scrutinizing the record and particularly taking into consideration
the custody period of the appellant-applicant and without making
any observation on the merits of the case, we are inclined to
suspend the sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant.
7. Accordingly, this second application for suspension of
sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the Additional
Sessions Judge No. 4, Bikaner vide judgment dated 01.06.2019 in
Sessions Case No.56/2013 against the appellant-applicant - Nemi
Chand S/o Uda Ram shall remain suspended till final disposal
of the appeal, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfac-
tion of the learned trial judge for his appearance in this Court on
16.10.2023 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
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,
they will give in writing their changed address to
the trial Court.
[2023:RJ-JD:29635-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1134/2023]
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.
(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J
62-Mohan/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
