Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Laxman vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 14 September, 2023
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati, Kuldeep Mathur
[2023:RJ-JD:29681-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc 3rd Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 355/2023
Laxman S/o Dhula, Aged About 42 Years, B/c Hirat Meena , R/o
Kankaradara, Phala Hirat, P.t. Kotwali Dungarpur.
(At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Jaitawat.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Joshi, GA-cum-AAG, with
Mr. Rajat Chhaparwal, AAAG.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Judgment
14/09/2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on D.B. Criminal
Misc. 3th (Suspension of Sentence) Application
No.355/2023.
2. The second application for Suspension of Sentence was
rejected by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated
26.07.2022.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
appellant-applicant, accused and the deceased were brothers.
Learned counsel submitted that an altercation happened in which
the child and wife of the deceased were also injured but the
persons who were alleged to have inflicted injuries to the child and
[2023:RJ-JD:29681-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-355/2023]
wife of the deceased, have already been acquitted by the learned
trial court.
4. Learned counsel submitted that there is single injury and
there was no premeditation for causing the same. Learned counsel
submitted that the appellant-applicant has undergone custody for
about eight years and three months.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has placed
reliance on the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of Stalin Vs. State represented by the Inspector of
Police in Criminal Appeal No.577 of 2020 (decided on
09.09.2020) and Anbazhagan Vs. The State represented by
the Inspector of Police (decided on 20.07.2023).
6. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submitted that
the single injury alleged to have been inflicted shows that it was
caused as a result of an altercation, which had happened, though
no intention to kill was there.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant thus, submitted
that the suspension of sentence application deserves to be allowed
as the final hearing of the appeal is likely to take a long time.
8. Mr. Joshi, learned AAG, opposes the application for
Suspension of Sentences but at the same time could not refute
the fact that the present appellant-applicant has already
undergone the custody period of eight years three months.
9. Learned AAG also accepts that there is only single injury on
the body of the deceased, though it is on a temporal region.
[2023:RJ-JD:29681-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-355/2023]
10. On a conjoint consideration of the facts that there is only
single injury, the appellant-applicant and deceased were close
relatives, sudden altercation has happened, there is a custody of
eight years three months which has already been undergone by
the appellant-applicant so also the judgment cited by learned
counsel for the appellant-applicant, this Court is inclined to
suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant-applicant.
11. Accordingly, the present D.B. Criminal Misc. 3rd
(Suspension of Sentence) Application is allowed and it is
ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court
vide judgment dated 21.04.2018 in Sessions Case No.54/2016
against appellant Laxman S/o Dhula 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 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 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.
12. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as
[2023:RJ-JD:29681-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-355/2023]
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
3-Prashant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
