Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Krishna Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan on 17 April, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence (Revision)
Application No.117/2025
in
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 457/2025
Krishna Kumar S/o Sh. Anandilal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Ward No. 3, Purani Aabadi, Sriganganagar, Dist. Sriganganagar,
Raj. (Lodged In Central Jail Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Choudhary, Addl. G.A.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
17/04/2025
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been
moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated
01.09.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Taranagar
in Criminal Regular case No.248/2012, whereby he was convicted
and sentenced for the offences under Section 498A and 406 of the
IPC and for each offence, he has been sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment of one year. The petitioner preferred an
appeal against the aforesaid judgment bearing Criminal Appeal
No.63/2015, which came to be partly allowed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Taranagar, District Churu, whereby
while affirming the conviction and sentence for the offence under
(2 of 3)
Section 498A of the IPC, the petitioner has been acquitted from
the offence under Section 406 of the IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are
several flaws and discrepancies in the prosecution case and the
learned trial court as well as the learned appellate court has
committed an error of law in appreciating the evidence brought on
record, therefore, the material would be required to be
appreciated again. The petitioner has a strong arguable case in
his favour. He was on bail during trial and during the course of
appeal. Hearing of the revision petition would likely take long
time.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public
Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
4. Upon consideration of the grounds raised in the memo of the
revision, looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of the
case, more particularly the facts that the accused-petitioner was
on bail during the course of trial and appeal and 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.
(3 of 3)
5. 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 against the petitioner-
applicant named above, which was further affirmed by the
appellate court to the extent of Section 498A of the IPC, 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 16.05.2025 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 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), they
will give in writing their changed address to the trial
Court.
(FARJAND ALI),J
98-Pramod/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
