Allowed

Mukesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC25 Oct 2016SOSR/272/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a suspension for sentence application filed under Section 397 CrPC by an accused already behind bars, ordering that sentence execution be suspended pending a revision petition subject to a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Execution of sentence to be suspended pending revision petition subject to personal bond of Rs. 2,00,000 and two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000 each.

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

SB Criminal Misc. Suspension for Sentence Application No.272/2016

¶3

¶4

SB Criminal Revision Petition No.979/2016

¶5

Mukesh Kumar

¶6

...Accused petitioner

Versus

State of Rajasthan

...Respondent

Date of Order :: 25^th October, 2016

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶12

Mr. Vipul Jaiman & Mr. Dharmendra Barala, counsel for the petitioner

¶13

Dr. RS Shekhawat, PP for the State

¶14

This application for suspension for sentence

¶15

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

¶16

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 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

¶17

¶18

suspended during the pendency of the revision petition.

¶19

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) Mukesh Kumar S/o Banwari Lal, by the trial court vide judgment dated 17.9.2012 passed in Case No. 23/495/09 and affirmed by the appellate court vide judgment dated 29.6.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 21/2012, 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 on 25^th November, 2016 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.

¶20

(Mahesh Chandra Sharma) J.

¶21

Mukesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar 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

Har Sahay Meena Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Dashrath Singh Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Dashrath Singh Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Motilal Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Tej Singh Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp