Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Magni Ram vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 12 August, 2025
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2025:RJ-JD:35912-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension Of Sentence
Application (Appeal) No. 1652/2024
in
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 286/2024
Magni Ram S/o Pema, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Chipakhera,
Police Station Mangalwad, Tehsil Dungla, District Chittorgarh.
(Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K. Charan
Mr. Abhishek Charan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Rathore, Public Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA
Order
12/08/2025
1. The present application has been filed by the applicant under
section 430 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
(hereinafter referred to as 'the BNSS') (section 389 of Criminal
Procedure Code) seeking suspension of following sentences
awarded to him by the learned Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Begu, Chittorgarh (hereinafter referred to as 'trial Court')
vide judgment dated 01.10.2024 passed in Session Case No.
133/2021:-
S.No Offence Sentence Fine
1. 302 IPC Life Imprisonment To pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in
default thereof to further
undergo three years' S.I.
[2025:RJ-JD:35912-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1652/2024]
2. 201 IPC Seven Years' S.I. To pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-; in
default thereof to further
undergo six years' S.I.
3. 420 IPC Three Years' Simple To pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-; in
Imprisonment default thereof to further
undergo six months' S.I.
4. 120-B Three Years' Simple To pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-; in
IPC Imprisonment default thereof to further
undergo three months' S.I.
2. Mr. R.K. Charan, learned counsel for the applicant at the
outset submitted that the applicant was apprehended in the year
2023 and during trial he remained on bail.
3. Adverting to contentions on merit of his case, learned
counsel submitted that the applicant has been convicted under
section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as
'the IPC') with the aid of section 120-B of IPC.
4. While submitting that it is a settled proposition of law that no
accused can be convicted solely on the basis of a confessional
statement, learned counsel contended that there is no
incriminating evidence against the applicant except Exhibit-P/83.
He argued that no recovery was made from the applicant and so
far as the CCTV footage - on the basis whereof the investigating
officer had apprehended the applicant is concerned, no certificate
under section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act was obtained, as is
evident from the cross-examination of the investigating officer
Virendra Singh (P.W.25).
5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application by
contending that the applicant's presence on the scene of
[2025:RJ-JD:35912-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1652/2024]
occurrence is proved and that he is guilty of the offence of
committing murder.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
7. Apart from the confessional statement of the applicant, the
only other evidence is the CCTV footage. Concededly, no
certificate under section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act was
obtained. Hence, the reliance upon such CCTV footage cannot be
made.
8. Furthermore, though the call details and location details of
other co-accused were taken, but so far as the present applicant is
concerned, call details and location details were not at all obtained
and produced on record.
9. In view of the aforesaid, we are persuaded to accept the
present application for suspension of sentence moved on behalf of
the accused - applicant - Magni Ram is concerned.
10. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
by the applicant is hereby allowed. It is ordered that the
sentence passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Begu, Chittorgarh in Session Case No.133/2021 against the
applicant - Magni Ram S/o Pema shall remain suspended till
final disposal of the appeal and he shall be released on bail,
provided he execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 12.09.2025
[2025:RJ-JD:35912-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1652/2024]
and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on
the conditions indicated below:-
(i) That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of
January of every year till the appeal is decided.
(ii) 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.
(iii) Similarly, if the sureties change their address, they will give in
writing their changed address to the trial Court.
11. 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.
12. Needless to state that the observations made hereinabove in
relation to guilt or otherwise of the applicant are prima-facie
opinion considering the material to the extent necessary for the
purpose of consideration of instant application. None of the parties
shall rely upon the findings or observations made herein at the
time of arguing or final hearing of the appeal.
(SANGEETA SHARMA),J (DINESH MEHTA),J
12-Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
