Satish @ Satya Narayan S/O Devpal vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 1819 Raj/2

Rajasthan High Court

Satish @ Satya Narayan S/O Devpal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 14 March, 2024

Bench: Pankaj Bhandari, Sameer Jain

[2024:RJ-JP:12771-DB]

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

     D.B. Criminal Misc 2nd Suspension Of Sentence Application No.
                                     626/2023

                                           IN

                   D.B. Criminal Appeal No.119/2022

Satish @ Satya Narayan S/o Devpal, Aged About 24 Years,
Resident      of    Dabich,         Police       Station            Khandar,   District
Sawaimadhopur
(At Present Confined In Central Jail Sevar, Bharatpur)
                                                             ----Accused Appellant
                                       Versus
State of Rajasthan
                                                                       ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Tarun Jain
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Javed Choudhary, Addl. G.A.



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

                                        Order

14/03/2024

1. Accused-applicant has preferred this second application for

suspension of sentence.

2. Heard on second application for suspension of sentence.

3. It is contended by counsel appearing for the accused-

applicant that applicant has remained in custody for a period of

more than eight years and nine months. In another case, in which

he was imprisoned for ten years, his sentence has been

suspended. It is also contended that disposal of the appeal is

bound to take time. Reliance is placed upon "Saudan Singh Vs.

State of Uttar Pradesh" (Criminal Appeal No.308/2022) decided

[2024:RJ-JP:12771-DB] (2 of 2) [SOSA-626/2023]

by the Hon'ble Apex Court on 25.02.2022 and similar judgments

on ground of period of custody.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant and Additional

Government Advocate have opposed the second application for

suspension of sentence. It is contended that applicant has criminal

antecedents and as many as ten cases were registered against

him, out of which, he stands convicted in three cases. His criminal

antecedents are across border also i.e. in the State of Madhya

Pradesh.

5. We have considered the contentions.

6. The judgment cited by the applicant could not apply to the

facts of the present case, as in the present case, the applicant has

criminal antecedents and he stands convicted in another case

which is heinous in nature and was sentenced to 10 years

imprisonment.

7. In view of the above, we are not inclined to entertain the

second application for suspension of sentence and the same is

accordingly dismissed.

8. However, taking note of the custody period, list the appeal

for hearing at an early date.

(SAMEER JAIN),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

JKP/Deepak-1

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)