Smt Meera vs State Of Rajasthan
2025 Latest Caselaw 99 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 99 Raj
Judgement Date : 1 May, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Smt Meera vs State Of Rajasthan on 1 May, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
      S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application
                           No.811/2025
                                       in
             S.B. Criminal Appeal (SB) No. 872/2025

1.     Smt Meera W/o Keshra Ram, Aged About 68 Years,
       Resident Of Ravwala, Police Station Bajju, Tehsil Kolayat,
       District Bikaner.
2.     Rameshwari W/o Shrawan, Aged About 35 Years,
       Resident Of Ravwala, Police Station Bajju, Tehsil Kolayat,
       District Bikaner.
       (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Bikaner)
                                                                 ----Appellants
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. J.K. Suthar
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, DyGA



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

01/05/2025

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the appellant-applicants in the matter of

judgment dated 28.04.2025 passed by the learned Additional

Sessions Judge No.6, Bikaner in Sessions Case No.50/2020,

whereby they were convicted for the offences under Sections

307/149, 326/149, 325/149, 324/149, 323/149, 341/149, 147

and 148 of the IPC and were awarded maximum sentence of 7

years' R.I. for the offences under Sections 307/149 and 326/149

of the IPC and lesser sentences for the other offences, alongwith

fine and default sentences.

(2 of 3)

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that the

learned trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and

factual aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous

conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be

appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court.

Early hearing of the appeal is not likely, therefore, the application

for suspension of sentence may be granted specially looking to the

fact that the applicants are woman.

3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-

applicants for releasing the appellants on bail by suspending their

sentences.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. Considering the submission that the appellant-applicants

Smt. Meera and Smt. Rameshwari are women aged 70 years and

37 years respectively and special provision of bail is made by the

statute for women, so also the fact that they were exonerated by

the police after conducting thorough investigation, but impleaded

as accused only upon the request made by the prosecution by

moving an application under Section 193 of the CrPC and hearing

of the appeal is likely to take time, this court is inclined to

suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant-applicants during

the pendency of the appeal.

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentence passed by learned trial court against the appellant-

applicants Smt. Meera and Smt. Rameshwari shall remain

(3 of 3)

suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and they shall

be released on bail provided each of them executes a personal

bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties of Rs.25,000/-

each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for her

appearance in this court on 02.06.2025 and whenever ordered to

do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated

below:-

1. That she will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant changes the place of residence, she will give in writing her changed address(es) 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.

8. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of

the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered

as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the

accused-applicant(s) was tried and convicted. A copy of this order

shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc.

file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating

to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the

said accused applicant does not appear before the trial court, the

learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for

cancellation of bail.

(FARJAND ALI),J 123-Pramod/-