Dinesh vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 7273 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7273 Raj
Judgement Date : 15 September, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Dinesh vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 September, 2023

Bench: Farjand Ali

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.274/2023

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 990/2023

Dinesh S/o Udai Lal Suvalka, Aged About 31 Years, Chandgarh, P.s. Bigod, Dist. Bhilwara (Raj.). (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Chittorgarh).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. Smt. Rukman Suhalka W/o Dinesh D/o Moti Lal, Semaliya, P.s. Gangrar, Dist. Chittorgarh (Raj.).

                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :    Mr. Kuldeep Sharma
For Respondent(s)              :    Mr. S.S. Rajpurohit, P.P.



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                       Order

15/09/2023

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated

31.05.2016 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gangrar,

District-Chittorgarh in Criminal Regular Case No.153/2014

whereby he was convicted and sentenced to suffer maximum

imprisonment of one year's simple imprisonment along with fines

of Rs.1,000/- each under Section 498-A of IPC as well under

Section 406 of IPC and lesser punishment for the other offence

under Sections 323 of IPC and under Section 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act.

(2 of 3)

2. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the learned

trial Court as well as appellate Court have not appreciated the

correct, legal and factual aspects of the matter and thus, reached

at an erroneous conclusion of guilt. He was on bail during the

course of trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted to him;

hearing of the revision is likely to take long time, therefore, the

application for suspension of sentence may be granted.

3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicant for

releasing the petitioner on application for suspension of sentence.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the

parties and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of

the case, more particularly the facts that it is a matter of marital

tiff and the accused-petitioner was on bail during the course of

trial and the course of appeal but never misused the liberty so

granted to him, the revision petition has already been admitted

and hearing of revision is likely to take further more time and

considering the overall submissions while refraining from passing

any comments on the niceties of the matter and the defects of the

prosecution as the same may put an adverse effect on hearing of

the revision, there seems no justification in keeping him behind

the bars for an indefinite period, thus, this court is of the opinion

that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the

accused-petitioner.

(3 of 3)

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentence passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Gangrar, District-

Chittorgarh who passed the impugned order dated 31.05.2016 in

Criminal Regular Case No.153/2014 against the petitioner-

applicant- Dinesh S/o Udai Lal Suvalka shall remain suspended

till final disposal of the aforesaid revision and he shall be released

on bail 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 revision 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 applicant 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.