Allowed

Sunil Kumar v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC24 Oct 2016SOSR/397/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge allowed an application for suspension of sentence filed alongside a revision petition. The execution of the sentence awarded by the trial court and affirmed by the appellate court is suspended during the pendency of the revision, subject to a bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Execution of sentence awarded by trial and appellate courts is suspended during pendency of revision; applicant to furnish bond of Rs. 2,00,000 and ensure sureties of Rs. 1,00,000 each.

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

SB Criminal Misc. Suspension for Sentence Application No.397/2016

¶3

¶4

SB Criminal Revision Petition No. 1401/2016

¶5

Sunil Kumar S/o Jawahara Ram, by caste Jat, resident of Ghassu Ka Bas, Police Station Laxmangarh, District Sikar (Raj.)

¶6

(At present accused petitioner is lodged in district Jail, Sikar)

¶7

...Accused petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Rajasthan through PP

¶10

...Respondent

¶11

Date of Order :: 24^th October, 2016

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶13

Mr. Sumer Singh, counsel for the petitioner Mr. Rishi Raj Singh PP for the State

¶14

This application for suspension for sentence

¶15

has been filed by the petitioner(s) under Section 397 readwith Section 401 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

¶17

¶18

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.

¶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) Sunil Kumar S/o Jawahara Ram, by the trial court vide judgment dated 10.8.2015 passed in Cr. Case No. 1022/2014 and affirmed by the appellate court vide judgment dated 23.8.2016 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 35/2016, 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 24^th November, 2016 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.

¶20

(Mahesh Chandra Sharma) J.

¶21

Sunil Kumar v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil 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

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

Devendra Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Deep Chand Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp