Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Narayan vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 9 May, 2025
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:22395-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 101/2024
1. Narayan S/o Shri Raya, Aged About 61 Years, R/o
Charpotiya Bada, Presently Chayani, Police Station
Parsola. District Pratapgarh. (Raj) (At Present Lodged In
District Jail Pratapgarh)
2. Harish S/o Shri Narayan, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Charpotiya Bada, Presently Chayani, Police Station
Parsola, District Pratapgarh. (Raj) (At Present Lodged In
District Jail Pratapgarh)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Purohit
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
09/05/2025
1. The appellant-applicants herein has been convicted and
sentenced as below vide judgment dated 03.08.2023 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Sessions Case
No.99/2017:
Offence Sentence Fine
302/149 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.25,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo six
months' R.I.
364 IPC Ten years' R.I. Rs.10,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo three
months' R.I.
148 IPC Three years' R.I. Rs.3,000/- and in default of
which to further undergo one
month's R.I.
[2025:RJ-JD:22395-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-101/2024]
2. The appellant-applicants have 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-applicants submits that
there are omnibus allegations upon all the accused persons and
the co-accused Kaniya, Shankar, Suraj and Rama (in D.B. Criminal
Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No.1656/2023); Shanti and Tulsi (in D.B. Criminal Misc.
Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No.1481/2023) have
already been released on bail. He further submits that the
accused - Narayan has undergone a total custody period of 03
years, 10 months & 2 days as on 18.03.2025 and accused Harish
has undergone a total custody period of 03 years, 8 months & 3
days as on 08.05.2025. He has taken this Court to the statement
of PW-11 Shambhoo, who is the son of the deceased, in which he
has attributed the axe to the accused Narayan. Thereafter, learned
counsel has taken this Court to the statement of PW-18 (Dr.
Gajendra), who has categorically deposed that all the wounds
were lacerated and that there was no injury of axe.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. He
affirms that the accused appellants have undergone custody of
more than three years. Learned Public Prosecutor is unable to
refute that all the allegations are omnibus and other co-accused
persons have already been granted bail.
5. This Court on a conjoint consideration of the fact that the
accused appellants have undergone custody of more than three
[2025:RJ-JD:22395-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-101/2024]
years and sentences of other co-accused persons have already
been suspended, deems it appropriate to suspend the substantive
sentence of the appellant-applicants 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 the learned Sessions
Judge, Pratapgarh in Sessions Case No.99/2017, against the
appellant-applicants - (1) Narayan S/o Shri Raya & (2) Harish
S/o Shri Narayan, shall remain suspended till final disposal of
the aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on bail, provided
they execute 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 their appearance in this court on 10.07.2025 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 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-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
[2025:RJ-JD:22395-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-101/2024]
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.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
12-nirmala/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
