Rajasthan High Court
Suresh Meena Son Of Motiram vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:37957) on 6 September, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Upman
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2024:RJ-JP:37957]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1344/2024
IN
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1975/2024
Suresh Meena Son Of Motiram, Aged About 40 Years, Resident
Of Khanpur, Police Station, Sadar Badi, District Dholpur
(Rajasthan). (Presently Confined In District Jail, Dholpur).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Umesh Kumar Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
06/09/2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and
learned Public Prosecutor on the application for suspension of
execution of sentence. Perused the material available on record.
2. The applicant-appellant herein has been convicted for offence
under Section 307 of IPC vide judgment dated 06.08.2024 passed
by learned Additional Sessions Judge Badi, District Dholpur (Raj.)
in Sessions Case No.101/2014 and has been sentenced to
maximum punishment of seven years.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that learned trial
court has erred in convicting and sentencing the applicant as
mentioned above. Learned trial court has not appreciated the
evidence in right and correct perspective. Counsel submits that
cross cases have been registered between the parties. He submits
[2024:RJ-JP:37957] (2 of 3) [SOSA-1344/2024]
that complainant has also been convicted for the offence under
Section 325 of IPC. It is further submitted that during trial,
applicant was on bail and he did not misuse the liberty of bail.
Counsel submits that maximum term of sentence is seven years.
He argues that there is no immediate prospect of early hearing
and disposal of the appeal.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes submissions made by the
learned counsel for appellant.
5. Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf
of the appellant and having regard to the facts and circumstances
as available on the record, especially the fact that cross cases
have been registered between the parties and complainant has
also been convicted under Section 325 of IPC; during trial
appellant was on bail and hearing of appeal would take long time,
but without making any comment on the merits/demerits of the
case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has available
to him strong grounds to assail the impugned judgment of
conviction and sentence. Thus, it is a fit case for suspending the
sentences awarded to the accused appellant during pendency of
the instant appeal.
6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentences passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Badi,
District Dholpur (Raj.) vide judgment dated 06.08.2024 in
Sessions Case No.101/2014 against the appellant-applicant
Suresh Meena Son Of Motiram shall remain suspended till final
[2024:RJ-JP:37957] (3 of 3) [SOSA-1344/2024]
disposal of the aforesaid appeal 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 10.10.2024
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 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.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),
he will give in writing their changed address to the
trial Court.
7. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as
Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-
applicant 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 applicant does not appear before the trial court, the
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
GAUTAM JAIN /103
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
