Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dalla @ Dalichand vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 15 May, 2025
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:23492-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 273/2025
Dalla @ Dalichand S/o Hema Mogya, Aged About 55 Years, R/o
Nai Abadi Nandoli, Police Station Nikumbh, District Chittorgarh.
(Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pravin Vyas
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
15/05/2025
1. The appellant-applicant herein has been convicted and
sentenced as below vide judgment dated 20.12.2023 passed by
learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, No.1, Nimbahera,
Campt at Badi Sadri, District Chittorgarh in Sessions Case
No.42/2016:
Offence Sentence Fine
302 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.2,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo one
month's R.I.
450 IPC 7 years' R.I. Rs.2,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo one
month's R.I.
2. The appellant-applicant has preferred this application for
suspension of sentence under Section 430 of BNSS for suspension
[2025:RJ-JD:23492-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-273/2025]
of sentences during the pendency of the appeal and for release on
bail.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has pointed out
that on 08.04.2016, it was reported by the complainant (son of
the deceased) that on 07.04.2016 at about 6:30 PM, he left from
the house while his mother was at the house and he returned at
about 12:15 AM, he saw that his mother was lying in a pool a
blood. The complainant also mentioned that no valuables or any
kind of ornaments etc. were taken away. He further submits that
initially there was no clue as to why the crime have been
undertaken but thereafter, the only witness that emerged was PW-
9 Prakash. He also submits that even the evidence of PW-9
Prakash was not trustworthy because in his trial court's statement
he has only expressed his opinion that crime might have been
committed by the present accused and has admitted in the cross
examination that he was not present at the site when the incident
took place.
3.1. Learned counsel submits that FSL report connects the blood
group but in the given circumstances, when there is no motive,
the connection of the blood group itself would not be sufficient to
drive the case beyond reasonable doubt so as to keep the
appellant in the custody after conviction. He further submits that
the appellant has undergone the actual custody of more than 9
years.
4. Learned GA-cum-AAG opposes the application for suspension
of sentence but at the same time confirms that the accused
appellant has undergone the actual custody of more than 9 years.
Learned AAG is unable to take this Court to any direct evidence
[2025:RJ-JD:23492-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-273/2025]
except FSL report, which could connect the accused with the crime
in question.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and
upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the Bar,
especially the fact that the accused appellant has undergone
actual custody of more than 9 years, this Court deems it
appropriate to suspend the substantive sentence of the appellant-
applicant during the pendency of the appeal.
6. Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of
sentence filed under Section 430 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered
that substantive sentence passed by learned Additional District
and Sessions Judge, No.1, Nimbahera, Campt at Badi Sadri,
District Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No.42/2016, against the
appellant-applicant - Dalla @ Dalichand S/o Hema Mogya,
shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal
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/-
to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance in this
court on 15.07.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the
disposal of the appeal 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 change 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.
[2025:RJ-JD:23492-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-273/2025]
7. 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 relating 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 been taken into account for statistical purpose relating to
pendency and disposal of the cases in the trial court. In case the
said accused-applicant does not appear before the trial court,
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
21-nirmala/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
