Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bhura Ram vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 6 May, 2025
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:21611-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 422/2025
Bhura Ram S/o Partap Singh, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Village
And Post Pacharwali, PS Bhirani Tehsil Bhadra District
Hanumangarh (At Present Lodged At Central Jail Bikaner)
----Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Moti Singh with
Mr. Manoj Kumar Chotia
For Respondent(s) : Mr. C.S. Ojha, AAG
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
06/05/2025
1. The appellant-applicant herein has been convicted and
sentenced as below vide judgment dated 19.10.2023 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadra, District
Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.19/2018:
Offence Sentence Fine
302 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.5,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo two
years' S.I.
148 IPC Three years' R.I. Rs.1,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo two
months' S.I.
147 IPC Two years' R.I. Rs.5,00/- and in default of
which to further undergo five
days' S.I.
323/149 IPC One year's S.I. Rs.5,00/- and in default of
which to further undergo one
month's S.I.
341 IPC One month's S.I. Rs.5,00/- and in default of
which to further undergo five
days' S.I.
[2025:RJ-JD:21611-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-422/2025]
2. The appellant-applicant has preferred the application for
suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for
suspension of sentences during the pendency of the appeal
and for release on bail.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has undergone a custody of 7 years, 01 months and
10 days as on 07.03.2025.
3.1 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
report was lodged on 24.04.2018, alleging that while the
complainant and his family were harvesting their crops, they
were attacked by Bhura Ram, Rajesh, Pratap Singh, Kanshi
Ram, and Sajjan.
3.2 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that only
Bhura Ram and Rajesh have been convicted in the present
case. He further submits that the axe blow has been
attributed to Bhura Ram, while the hockey blow has been
attributed to Rajesh. It is also submitted that Rajesh has
already been granted suspension of sentence by this Hon'ble
Court in D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence
Application (Appeal) No.1476/2023. Learned counsel has
further drawn the attention of this Court to the statement of
PW-10, Pushpa, wherein she deposed that Bhura Ram
delivered the axe blow and Rajesh caused an injury on the
parietal region, which resulted in multiple fractures.
3.3 Learned counsel for the appellant has further drawn the
attention of this Court to the testimony of PW-7, Banwari Lal, who
reiterated the same facts as stated by PW-10. He has also referred
to the statement of PW-22, Dr. Mahaveer Kumar, who deposed
[2025:RJ-JD:21611-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-422/2025]
that both injuries were inflicted on vital parts of the body and
were responsible for the death of the deceased. Learned counsel
further submits that the appellant has remained in custody for a
period of seven years, one month, and ten days as on 07.03.2025.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application for
suspension of sentence; however, he is unable to refute the
aforesaid factual matrix, which includes the testimonies of
witnesses PW-10, PW-7, and PW-22, as submitted by the learned
counsel for the appellant. He also fairly submits that the appellant
has been in custody for a period of seven years, one month, and
ten days as on 07.03.2025. The factum of co-accused Rajesh
having been released on suspension of sentence is also evident.
5. This Court on a conjoint consideration of the submission
made by learned counsel for the appellant and the prolonged
custody of more than 7 years, we are inclined 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 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is
ordered that substantive sentence passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Bhadra, District Hanumangarh in Sessions Case
No.19/2018, against the appellant-applicant Bhura Ram S/o
Partap Singh, 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/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial
Judge for his appearance in this court on 06.07.2025 and
[2025:RJ-JD:21611-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-422/2025]
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.
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
Ashutosh/AbhishekK-23
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
