High Court allowed suspension of sentence for petitioner convicted under IPC 376 pending appeal, requiring bond and sureties for appearance on a specified date.
Suspension of sentence awarded to petitioner, subject to furnishing personal bond of ₹40,000/- and two surety bonds of ₹20,000/- each, for appearance on 08th February 2013.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.433/2012 (Harimohan Vs. State of Rajasthan)
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail (SOS) Application No.942/2012
1
IN THE HIGH OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJATHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail (SOS) Application No.942/2012 In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.433/2012 (Harimohan Vs. State of Rajasthan)
Date of Order : 08th January, 2013
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI
Mr.Anil Upman, for the petitioner/s. Mr.Laxman Meena, Public Prosecutor.
By the Court:
Heard learned counsel for the parties on application
for suspension of sentence application.
It is stated that petitioner is behind the bars for last two years. He is convicted for an offence under Section 376 of IPC where the petitioner has been punished with the imprisonment of seven years' with penalty. It is stated that if the evidence available on record is looked into, it comes out to be a case of consent, thus offence under Section 376 of IPC is not made out, thus accused-petitioner's sentence may be suspended during pendency of the appeal. This is moreso when, hearing of appeal may take time.
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail (SOS) Application No.942/2012 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.433/2012 (Harimohan Vs. State of Rajasthan)
2
Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand opposed
this application for suspension of sentence.
After considering the submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties, I deem it just and proper to suspend the sentence of the accused – petitioner during pendency of the appeal.
Accordingly, the application for suspension of
sentence is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence awarded to the accused – petitioner, namely, Harimohan s/o Shri Raghunath Meena in sessions case No.15/2011 shall remain suspended provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.40,000/- and two sureties bond of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court to the effect that he shall appear before the Court on 08th February, 2013 and, as and when called upon to do.
(M.N. BHANDARI), J.
S/No.32 Preety, Jr.P.A.
All cor r ect ion s m ad e in t h e j u d gm en t / or d er h ave been in cor por at ed in t h e j u dgm en t / or der bein g em ailed.
Pr eet y Asop a Jr .P.A.
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail (SOS) Application No.942/2012
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.433/2012 (Harimohan Vs. State of Rajasthan)
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition for suspension of sentence during appeal is maintainable.
Harimohan
State of Rajasthan
M.N. Bhandari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
