Allowed

Narendra @ Mahendra S/O Shri Mangal Chand B/C Khatik v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC28 Nov 2018SOSA/1248/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed suspension of sentence for two appellants convicted in a murder case, directing their release on bail during appeal pendency due to evidentiary gaps and prosecution inconsistencies.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended; release on bail conditioned on personal bond of Rs.50,000 each with one surety and appearance before Court on dated 02 Jan 2019.

Narendra @ Mahendra S/O Shri Mangal Chand B/C… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Criminal Misc. Application for Suspension of Sentence No.1248/2018

¶3

¶4

D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 383/2018

¶5

Narendra @ Mahendra S/o Shri Mangal Chand B/c Khatik, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Near Mahila College Jogiyon Ki Colony Ward No 29 Morija Road Chomu Ps Chomu Dist. Jaipur Presently Lodged In Central Jail Jaipur

¶6

Smt. Uganti Devi W/o Mangal Chand B/c Khatik, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Near Mahila College Jogiyon Ki Colony Ward No 29 Morija Road Chomu Ps Chomu Dist. Jaipur Presently Lodged In Central Jail Jaipur

¶7

----Appellants

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Raj.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr.Ajay Kumar Jain For Respondent(s) : Ms.Sonia Shandilya, Public Prosecutor

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA

¶13

Order

¶14

28/11/2018

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellants as well as learned Public Prosecutor on the application for suspension of sentence.

¶16

It is submitted that the trial Court has convicted the accused-appellants mainly in reference to dying declaration of the deceased recorded two days after the occurrence. Prior to the aforesaid, “Parcha Bayan” was recorded but it was not produced

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[SOSA-1248/2018]

¶19

by the prosecution, however, the author was produced by the accused-appellants. The “Rojnamcha” was also summoned to prove that “Parcha Bayan” was recorded earlier.

¶20

The occurrence took place while deceased was in kitchen to prepare food. The fire was caught out of the gas stove. No indication of pouring kerosene on her was found in the investigation. It was not mentioned even in the postmortem report, thus the subsequent story cooked by the prosecution is not corroborated and otherwise, reference of “Parcha Bayan”, recorded earlier, has not been given in subsequent dying declaration with the indication that it was given while in-laws had surrounded the deceased. Taking into consideration the aforesaid, the application for suspension of sentence may be allowed.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence. It is submitted that the dying declaration was recorded in the presence of the Magistrate, thus should be believed instead of “Parcha Bayan”.

¶22

We have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶23

Any comment at this stage may cause prejudice to either of the parties while arguing the appeal, thus we are refraining ourselves to make any comment on facts of the case but taking into consideration the evidence available on record, we find reason for grant of the application for suspension of sentence.

¶24

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that sentence awarded to accusedappellants namely (i) Narendra alias Mahendra s/o Shri Mangal Chand and (ii) Smt. Uganti Devi w/o Shri Mangal Chand by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, (Women Atrocity

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[SOSA-1248/2018]

¶27

Cases) No.2, Jaipur in Session Case No.33/2015 (CIS No.2649/2014) shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal and they be released on bail provided they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand only) each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court with the stipulation that they shall appear before this Court on 02^nd January, 2019 and whenever called upon to do so.

¶28

(BANWARI LAL SHARMA),J

¶29

(M.N. BHANDARI),J

¶30

Preeti/4

Narendra @ Mahendra S/O Shri Mangal Chand B/C Khatik v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra @ Mahendra S/O Shri Mangal Chand B/C Khatik 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramphool Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Hariom S/O Shri Badan Singh B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohammad Matalub S/O Jahir Mohammad B/C Musalmaan Vs State of Rajasthan

Ganeshlal Vs Ashok Kumar @ Pappu and Ors.

Rajulal S/O Babulal B/C Gujjar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp.

Naveen Singh S/O Shri Girdhari Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan through Chief Secretary (Homes)