Vijay Giri vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:18589)
2025 Latest Caselaw 11456 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 11456 Raj
Judgement Date : 15 April, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Vijay Giri vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:18589) on 15 April, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2025:RJ-JD:18589]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                     S.B. Criminal Stay No. 3046/2025

 Vijay Giri S/o Shri Ratan Giri, Aged About 34 Years, R/o At Bassi
 Tehsil Dist. Chittorgarh, Raj. And Vinayak Hotel, Collectorate
 Chouraha, Chittorgarh,raj. (Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur,raj. )
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
 1.      State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
 2.      Ramesh Chandra, S/o Shri Chunnilal Ji Aged About 46
         Years By Caste Joshi Resident Of House No.8 C Meera
         Nagar Tehsil And District Chittorgarh
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Mohit Singh Choudhary
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Shriram Choudhary, AGA
                                  Mr. Hardik Gautam



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

15/04/2025

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment

dated 17.12.2016 passed by the learned Special Judicial

Magistrate, (NI Act Cases), Chittorgarh in Regular Criminal

Case No.335/2016 whereby he was convicted and sentenced

to suffer maximum imprisonment of 01 year under Section

138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act.

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

trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual

aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous

conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be

appreciated again by this court. Hearing of the revision is

[2025:RJ-JD:18589] (2 of 3) [RSTAY-3046/2025]

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. The applicant is behind the bars since 22.08.2024 and the

parties have resolved the dispute amicably and as per the

compromise deed, the complainant has received the due

amount. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for

the parties and looking to the totality of facts and

circumstances of the case, more particularly the 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, this court is of the opinion that it is a

fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-

petitioner.

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 trial Court, the details of

which are provided in the first para of this order, against the

appellant-applicant named above shall remain suspended till

final disposal of the aforesaid revision and he shall be

[2025:RJ-JD:18589] (3 of 3) [RSTAY-3046/2025]

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 15.05.2025 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 revision 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.