Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shahjad @ Tiger vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 28 January, 2025
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
[2025:RJ-JD:5354-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1416/2024
IN
D.B. Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.260/2024
Shahjad @ Tiger S/o Shri Abdul Salam, Aged 30 Years, R/o
Inside Ajmeri Gate, P.s. Kotwali, Dist. Nagaur
(At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Nagaur)
----Applicant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Firoz Khan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. C.S. Ojha, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
HON'BLE JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
Order
28/01/2025
1. The present application for suspension of sentence under
Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been
preferred on behalf of the applicant - Shahjad @ Tiger, who has
been convicted and sentenced vide judgment and order dated
22.03.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2,
Nagaur in Sessions Case No.28/2016 (CIS No. 45/2016) for the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 read with 34 and
302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Mr. Firoz Khan, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant
submits that application for suspension of sentence of co-accused
Zakir @ Moda has already been allowed by co-ordinate Bench of
[2025:RJ-JD:5354-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1416/2024]
this Court vide its order dated 28.05.2024 passed in D.B. Criminal
Misc. S.O.S. Application (Appeal) No.509/2024. He submits that
the case of the present applicant-appellant is exactly identical to
that of Zakir @ Moda and therefore, this application be allowed on
the same count.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the present
application by submitting that there are as many as eight cases of
similar nature pending against the applicant-appellant. He was,
however, not in a position to dispute the fact that the case of the
applicant-appellant is identical to that of Zakir @ Moda.
4. While allowing the application for suspension of sentence in
the case of Zakir @ Moda (supra), this Court has observed thus:
"3. Mr. Chetan Singh Bhati & Mr. Lal Singh Rathore, learned
counsel for the appellant-applicant argued that the appellant-
applicant has been convicted on the basis of conjectures and
surmises, without there being any evidence. He highlighted that
the First Information Report (Ex.P/7) was lodged pursuant to the
written complaint by one Prasad Ram Nayak (PW-2), who has
turned hostile and another alleged eye-witness namely, Baudi
(PW-1) who was produced by the prosecution as eye-witness also
cannot be termed as an eye-witness as has been held by the
learned trial Court.
4. Learned counsel submitted that since it was not a case of
direct evidence, the applicant's conviction was based on
circumstantial evidence and that too, only on the basis of
recovery of a "Lathi". Learned counsel argued that the recovery of
"Lathi" could be a corroborative evidence but not a substantive
evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged crime. He
thus, prayed that the present applicant, who has remained
behind the bars for one year and nine months be enlarged on
bail.
5. Mr. Bishnoi, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the
application for suspension of sentences and submitted that the
applicant has criminal antecedents and as many as eight cases
are pending against him.
[2025:RJ-JD:5354-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1416/2024]
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record of the case.
7. Indisputably, it is not a case of direct evidence. The applicant
has been convicted only on the basis of circumstantial evidence,
that too, on the basis of recovery of a "Lathi". It is to be noticed
that while doing postmortem of the deceased, the relatives and
other family members of the deceased informed the same to be a
case of RTA (Road Traffic Accident) and even in the cross-
examination of the Doctor, he has accepted the suggestion that
the nature of injuries suffered by the deceased could be caused,
if the deceased had fallen from the motorcycle.
8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we
are inclined to accept the present application for suspension of
sentences filed on behalf of the applicant-appellant."
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the parity of facts with the case of Zakir @ Moda, we
are inclined to accept the present suspension of sentence
application.
7. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
by the applicant-appellant is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2,
Nagaur vide order dated 22.03.2024 in Sessions Case No.28/2016
(CIS No. 45/2016) against the applicant - Shahjad @ Tiger S/o
Shri Abdul Salam, shall remain suspended till final disposal of
the present appeal provided he executes a personal bond in the
sum of ₹50,000 along with two sound and solvent sureties to the
tune of ₹25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his
appearance in this Court on 03.03.2025 and whenever ordered to
do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated
below:-
[2025:RJ-JD:5354-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1416/2024]
(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 he 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.
8. 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.
(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J (DINESH MEHTA),J
78-minki/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
