Disposed

Rinku Tomar Alias Chandrapal Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2025CRLA/768/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Conviction under Sections 392 and 411 IPC and Section 15 Dacoity Affected Areas Act by Special Court, Jhansi; appellant sought suspension of sentence citing ill-health. Medical report confirmed spinal surgery and inability to walk unaided. Sentence suspended on furnishing bail bonds.

What did the court decide?

Remaining sentence suspended subject to furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to satisfaction of CJM, Jhansi.

Rinku Tomar Alias Chandrapal Singh vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 768 of 2025

¶3

Appellant :- Rinku Tomar Alias Chandrapal Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Atharva Dixit,Fizah Andrea Haqq Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

¶5

(Order on appeal)

¶6

List this appeal in due course.

¶7

(Order on Suspension of Sentence Application)

¶8

Applicant-Appellant, namely, Rinku Tomar Alias Chandrapal Singh has applied for suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal, arising against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.01.2025 passed by Special Court (Dacoity Affected Area), Jhansi in Special Trial No.10 of 2012, titled State of U.P. Vs. Rinku Tomar Alias Chandrapal Singh , thereby convicting the appellant under Sections 392, 411 I.P.C., who has been sentenced for commission of various offences along with fine.

¶9

The applicant-convict was prosecuted through Case Crime No.190 of 2011, under Sections 392, 411 IPC and Section 15 Dacoity Affected Areas Act, 1983, registered at Police Station- Sakrar, District- Jhansi.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant submits that the trial court has overlooked the material discrepancies in the prosecution case while passing the impugned judgment of conviction dated 4.01.2025. Learned counsel has submitted that against the sentence of ten years imposed upon the applicant, he has undergone slightly more than ten months, but he is not keeping good health and has undergone a spinal surgery. According to the learned counsel, the applicant is unable to walk on his own and requires support even for standing, therefore, he prays for suspension of sentence.

¶11

Vide order dated 15th May, 2025, learned State was directed to

¶12

ascertain the health status of the applicant and in response an affidavit dated 28th May, 2025 by Medical Officer, District Jail, Jhansi has been filed along with a report Annexure No.1 and perusal of the same reveals that because of unbearable back pain, the convict underwent a spinal surgery and he is continuously under treatment. As per the report dated 25th May, 2025, applicant is unable to walk or stand without any support and he is being given pain killers.

¶13

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, particularly the health condition of the applicant, who is around 45 years old, this Court deems it appropriate to suspend his sentence.

¶14

Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the appeal, the remaining sentence of the applicantappellant is suspended, subject to his furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi.

¶15

The application is allowed.

¶16

Order Date :- 29.5.2025 Raj

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rinku Tomar Alias Chandrapal Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinku Tomar Alias Chandrapal Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bihari Lal and Another vs Mukesh Chaudhari and 17 Others

Dr. Monika vs Dr. Punit Agrawal

Smt Khushboo Soni@ Khushboo Gupta vs Sachin Soni

Pradeep vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deepak and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Natthu vs State of U.P. and Another