Allowed

Har Sahay Meena v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC24 Oct 2016SOSR/262/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Single Judge allowed the suspension of sentence application filed under Section 397 CrPC. The execution of the sentence awarded in the trial court was suspended during the pendency of the revision petition, contingent upon the applicant furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Execution of the sentence awarded by the trial court and affirmed by the appellate court shall remain suspended during the pendency of the revision petition subject to furnishing a personal bond and t

Har Sahay Meena Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

SB Criminal Misc. Suspension for Sentence Application No. 262/2016

¶3

¶4

SB Criminal Revision Petition No.944/2016

¶5

Har Sahay Meena Son of Shri Ram Pal Meena, aged about 26 years, R/o Dhangaon Police Station Nainwa at present 1-E-9, Sanjay Nagar, Vigyan Nagar, Kota.

¶6

...Accused petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan through P.P.

¶9

...Respondent

¶10

Date of Order :: 24^th October, 2016

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶12

Mr. Naseemuddin Quazi) counsel for the petitioner Mr. Ambrish Balariya ) Dr. R.S. Shekhawat PP for the State

¶13

This application for suspension for sentence

¶14

has been filed by the petitioner(s) under Section 397 CrPC along-with the revision petition.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) has contended that the accused petitioner(s) is/are behind the bars. He has further contended that accused petitioner(s) was/were on bail during trial as well as during the pendency of appeal. He has annexed the Certificate

¶16

¶17

under Rule 311 (3) of High Court Rules to this effect and has prayed that in this view of the matter, this suspension of sentence application should be allowed and execution of sentence awarded to the petitioner(s) should be suspended during the pendency of the revision petition.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed same. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and carefully perused the entire material available on record, this suspension of sentence application is allowed and it is ordered that execution of sentence awarded to accused petitioner(s) Har Sahay Meena S/o Shri Ram Pal Meena, by the trial court vide judgment dated 17.7.2012 passed in Cr. Case No. 266/2005 and affirmed by the appellate court i.e. Addl. District and Sessions Judge No. 6, Kota vide judgment dated 29.6.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 108/2012, shall remain suspended during the pendency of the revision petition, provided he/she/they furnish(es) a personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rs. Two Lakh) together with two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh) each, to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he/she/they shall appear before this Court

¶19

¶20

on 24^th November, 2016 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.

¶21

(Mahesh Chandra Sharma) J.

¶22

Har Sahay Meena v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Har Sahay Meena v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

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

Similar cases

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Mohan Lal Saini Vs Shri Ravi Jain

Kamal Singh Vs Shri Ravi Jain

Sher Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Devendra Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp