Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bhiyanram @ Jayantilal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 24 September, 2024
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2024:RJ-JD:39794-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc 2nd Suspension Of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 1142/2024
Bhiyanram @ Jayantilal S/o Sh. Babu Lal, Aged About 30 Years,
R/o Village Malwada, P.s. Raniwada, Dist. Jalore (Raj.).
(Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Jodhpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Shah.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yogendra Singh Charan for
Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gurjar, GA-cum-AAG.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN
Order
24/09/2024
1. The appellant-applicant herein has been convicted and
sentenced as below vide judgment dated 02.03.2021 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhinmal, District Jalore in
Sessions Case No.62/2013 (CIS No.221/2014):
Offence Sentence Fine
302/34 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.20,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo 20
months' additional R.I.
397/34 IPC 07 years' R.I. Rs.10,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo 10
months' additional R.I.
2. The appellant-applicant has preferred this second application
for suspension of sentence under Section 430 B.N.S.S. for
suspension of sentences during the pendency of the appeal and
for release on bail.
[2024:RJ-JD:39794-DB] (2 of 3) [SOSA-1142/2024]
3. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that the
first suspension of sentence application was allowed by a Division
Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.02.2022 in D.B. Criminal
Misc. Suspension of Sentence (Appeal) No.335/2021.
3.1 He further submits that the applicant-appellant could not
comply with the conditions as stipulated in the order dated
16.02.2022, and thus, the bail bond was forfeited and the trial
court was directed to initiate the proceedings under Section 446 of
Cr.P.C. against the sureties and standing arrest warrant were
issued against the appellant-applicant for his production before
this Court.
3.2 He also submits that vide order dated 25.07.2024, this Court
directed the appellant to be sent to judicial custody and since
then, he is in judicial custody.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor though opposes the application for
suspension of sentence, but is unable to refute the aforesaid
factual matrix.
5. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of
the case, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the
substantive sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant during
the pendency of the appeal.
6. Accordingly, the instant second application for suspension of
sentence filed under Section 430 B.N.S.S. is allowed and the
applicant Bhiyanram @ Jayantilal S/o Sh. Babu Lal shall be
released from the imprisonment on his furnishing personal bond in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, as
already directed vide order dated 16.02.2022 passed in D.B.
Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence (Appeal) No.335/2021. The
[2024:RJ-JD:39794-DB] (3 of 3) [SOSA-1142/2024]
conditions imposed by this Court as contained in order dated
16.02.2022 shall remain operative. The proceedings initiated
against the applicant under Section 446 Cr.P.C. pending before the
trial court shall continue.
(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J (DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
137-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
