Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ashok Kumar Ranga Alias Kuku vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 7 May, 2025
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:21920-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 597/2025
Ashok Kumar Ranga Alias Kuku S/o Late Shri Haridas Ranga,
Aged About 54 Years, R/o Dabla At Present Jetha Para, P.s.
Kotwali, Dist. Jaisalmer. (Presently Lodged In Jaisalmer Jail)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. L.D. Khatri
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA cum AAG
Mr. Mridul Jain
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
07/05/2025
1. The appellant-applicant herein has been convicted and
sentenced as below vide judgment dated 11.03.2025 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer, in Sessions Case
No.170/2016 (32/2016):
Offence Sentence Fine
304-B IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.10,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo two
months' S.I.
120-B IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.10,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo two
months' S.I.
2. The appellant-applicant has preferred the application for
suspension of sentence under Section 430 B.N.S.S. for suspension
[2025:RJ-JD:21920-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-597/2025]
of sentences during the pendency of the appeal and for release on
bail.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this
Court to the Exhibit P-3 in which it is narrated by the complainant-
Ramakishan that house of Nawalkishore is adjoining to their
house. Nawal Kishore has a daughter namely Renuka who is 18
years of age. In the report, the father of the deceased narrated
that on 26.07.2015 at around 10.00 PM, a phone call was received
by his son, upon which, he went saying that he is going to the
house of Nawal Kishore, when he did not return, they searched
him, upon which, they found that his son Kailash was lying in the
kitchen of Nawal Kishore and he was taken to the hospital but was
brought dead. The allegation in the complaint was upon Nawal
Kishore and Renuka.
3.1 Learned counsel further submits that the post-mortem report
indicates that the cause of death was Asphyxia due to drowning
and also a positive test report of organicular poison was indicated.
3.2 Learned counsel further submits that there is a whole lot of
discrepency in the prosecution story and the chain of
circumstantial evidence is completely broken.
3.3 Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner was not
there in the original complaint but subsequently was arrayed as an
accused by improvement in the supplementary statement.
3.4 Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner was
granted bail by this Hon'ble Court in S.B. Cr. Misc. 2 nd Bail
Application No.4065/2016 on 16.05.2016 and thus remained on
bail during trial.
[2025:RJ-JD:21920-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-597/2025]
3.5 Learned counsel further submits that the dimensions of the
prosecution theory from the drowning to the poison to the place of
death being kitchen of Nawal Kishore does not drive home the
allegation proven beyond reasonable doubt.
3.6 Learned counsel further submits that there are no injuries or
any other incidental marks which could give indication of nature of
the crime.
3.7 Learned counsel further submits that Nawal Kishore who was
one of the accused and who was the father of the girl Renuka, has
already expired.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for
suspension of sentence.
5. This Court on conjoint consideration of the submissions made
by the learned counsel for the petitioner and while keeping into
consideration the Exhibit P-3 as well as the cause of death being
as Asphyxia due to drowning and presence of the poison
substance and thus, we find that there are loopholes in the story
of the prosecution. However, at this stage looking into such
submissions, this Court is not inclined to continue the custody and
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 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is
ordered that substantive sentence passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer, in Sessions Case
No.170/2016 (32/2016), against the appellant-applicant, namely,
Ashok Kumar Ranga Alias Kuku S/o Late Shri Haridas
Ranga, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid
[2025:RJ-JD:21920-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-597/2025]
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 07.07.2025 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.
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
71-ajayS/abhishek-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
