Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Chota vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 28 January, 2025
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur, Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:5432-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 826/2024
Smt. Chota W/o Late Shri Poonamchand, Aged About 62 Years,
B/c Harijan, R/o Lakhara Bazar, Harijan Basti, Jodhpur
(Lodged At Central Jail, Jodhpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan.
----Respondent
Connected With
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 824/2024
Amit @ Veera S/o Late Shri Poonamchand, Aged About 40 Years,
B/c Harijan, R/o Lakhara Bazar, Harijan Basti, Jodhpur
(Lodged At Central Jail, Jodhpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gokulesh Bohra.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, AAG.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment / Order
28/01/2025
1. The appellants-applicants herein have been convicted and
sentenced as below vide judgment dated 14.02.2019 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases),
Jodhpur Metropolitan, Jodhpur in Session Case No.39/2014 (NCV
NO.1053/2014):
Offence Sentence Fine
302/34 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.10,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo two
months' S.I.
[2025:RJ-JD:5432-DB] (2 of 5) [SOSA-826/2024]
2. The appellants-applicants have preferred the applications for
suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. during the
pendency of the appeal and for release on bail. Earlier applications
of the appellants - Smt. Chota and Amit @ Veera seeking
suspension of sentence were dismissed on 07.07.2022 and
06.05.2019 respectively.
3. The only plea raised by learned counsel for the appellants-
applicants is that as the applicants are in custody for more than
10 years and there is no chance of hearing of the appeal in near
future, thus, in view of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court dated 15.09.2022 in Sonadhar v. The State of Chhattisgarh
: SLP (Crl.) No.529/2021, the sentence of the applicants may be
suspended and they may be enlarged on bail.
4. Further submissions have been made that there are no
reasons and / or extenuating circumstances for denial of bail.
Submissions have also been made with reference to order dated
05.10.2021 in Saudan Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh : SLP
(Crl.) No.4633/2021, wherein also observations have been made
regarding grant of bail in the appeal at the High Court stage
except certain exceptions and that none of the exceptions are
applicable in the present cases.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants-appellants further submits
that the sentence of co-accused persons Kiran and Ajay @ Tony
has already been suspended by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 12.07.2024 and the cases of the present
applicants-appellants are not distinguishable from the cases of the
co-accused persons Kiran and Ajay @ Tony. He, therefore, prays
[2025:RJ-JD:5432-DB] (3 of 5) [SOSA-826/2024]
that the substantive sentences of the present applicants-
appellants may be suspended.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the applications for
suspension of sentence. However, he has not denied that the
appellants-applicants have already undergone sentence of more
than 10 years during trial and after sentence.
7. We have considered the submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on
record.
8. Looking to the fact that criminal appeal pertaining to year
2008 are pending for hearing, there is no likelihood of hearing of
the present appeal in near future.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sonadhar (supra),
while dealing with SMW (Crl.) No.4/2021 pertaining to 'life
convicts in jail whose appeals are pending before the High Court'
inter-alia, issued the following directions :-
"We consider appropriate to issue directions in terms of
the aforesaid suggestions to the Patna High Court and
on a pari materia basis to even the other High Courts.
However, in order to carry out this exercise, the data
would have to be compiled of such of the persons who
have been in custody for more than 10 years and more
than 14 years, with these persons being considered for
grant of bail pending appeal, if there is no chance of
hearing of the appeal in the near future, unless there are
reasons for denial of bail. We can understand if any of
the parties is delaying the appeal itself but short of that,
we are of the view that all persons who have completed
10 years of sentence and appeal is not in proximity of
hearing with no extenuating circumstances should be
enlarged on bail."
10. Prior to that in the case of Saudan Singh (supra) also
observations were made regarding grant of bail in cases where
convicts have undergone sentence for sufficiently long time and
[2025:RJ-JD:5432-DB] (4 of 5) [SOSA-826/2024]
appeals were pending at the High Court stage with exceptions
indicated therein.
11. In the present case as observed herein-before, the
appellants-applicants have already undergone sentence for more
than 10 years and apparently, there are no chances of hearing of
the present appeal in near future. Except for the fact that the
appellants-applicants were involved in offence leading to their
conviction for life, nothing has been brought on record by way of
extenuating circumstances for denial of suspension of sentence.
12. Consequently, following the order in the case of Sonadhar
(supra) and observations made in Saudan Singh (supra), without
making any observations on merits of the case and only on
account of the fact that more than 10 years' sentence has already
been undergone by the appellants-applicants, we are inclined to
suspend the substantive sentence of the appellants-applicants,
namely, Smt. Chota W/o Late Shri Poonamchand and Amit @
Veera S/o Late Shri Poonamchand, during the pendency of the
appeal.
13. Accordingly, the instant applications for suspension of
sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is
ordered that substantive sentence passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Case), Jodhpur Metropolitan,
Jodhpur in Session Case No.39/2014 (NCV NO.1053/2014) against
the appellants-applicants, namely, Smt. Chota W/o Late Shri
Poonamchand and Amit @ Veera S/o Late Shri
Poonamchand shall remain suspended till final disposal of the
aforesaid appeals and they shall be released on bail, provided that
both of them execute a separate personal bond in the sum of
[2025:RJ-JD:5432-DB] (5 of 5) [SOSA-826/2024]
Rs.50,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the
satisfaction of learned trial Judge for their appearance in this court
on 27.02.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of
the appeal on the conditions indicated below:
1. That they will appear before the trial court in the
month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicants change the place of residence,
they 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 his/their address(s)
they will give in writing their changed address to the trial
court.
14. The learned trial court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicants in a separate file. Such file be registered as
Criminal Misc. Case relating to original case in which the accused-
applicants were tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also
be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall
not been taken into account for statistical purpose relating to
pendency and disposal of the cases in the trial court. In case the
said accused-applicants do not appear before the trial court,
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
1-2-Shahenshah/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
