Allowed

Soorajmal S/O Keshrilal B/C Meghwal v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC12 Oct 2018SOSA/1262/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application for suspension of sentence pending appeal filed by appellants convicted under Section 498-A, 304-B, 120-B and 201 IPC. The court granted bail without commenting on the merits to avoid prejudice during the appeal pendency.

What did the court decide?

Sentence awarded to appellants by Special Judge Baran shall remain suspended; they are released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with one surety.

Soorajmal S/O Keshrilal B/C Meghwal… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Criminal Misc. SOS Application No. 1262/2018

¶3

¶4

Criminal Appeal No. 292/2018

¶5

Soorajmal S/o Keshrilal B/c Meghwal, R/o Phundaji Ki Tapariya (Jhopdiya) Koyla, Police Station Baran Sadar, District Sadar, Raj.(At Present In District Jail, Baran).

¶6

Kailash Bai W/o Soorajmal B/c Meghwal, R/o Phundaji Ki Tapariya (Jhopdiya) Koyla, Police Station Baran Sadar, District Sadar, Raj. (At Present In District Jail, Baran).

¶7

----Appellants

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Rajasthan.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Mahendra Sharma Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mrs. Soniya Shandilya P.P.

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

¶13

Order

¶14

12/10/2018

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellants as well as the learned Public Prosecutor on the application for Suspension of Sentence and perused the material available on record.

¶16

It is submitted that an appeal has been filed against the order dt. 18^th August, 2018, in Session Case No. 34/2016, C.I.S. No. 113/2016, whereby the accused-appellants have been convicted and sentenced for the offences under Section 498-A, 304-B read with 120-B and 201 I.P.C.

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[SOSA-1262/2018]

¶19

If the statements of witnesses produced by the prosecution are looked into, main allegation exits against co-accused Manoj @ Sonu. He is said to have beaten the deceased a day before occurrence. It was seen by PW-8-Manoj, who came a day before to extend invitation of marriage. The deceased was slapped by the accused Manoj @ Sonu in his presence.

¶20

The occurrence then took place on the next day when the accused-appellants, who are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased were not present. The dead body was seen by applicant’s mother in law Kailash Bai. In view of the above, there is no evidence against the applicants to connect them with the crime. It is more so when, the prosecution could not lead evidence to prove the case of demand of dowry by the present applicants. In view of the above, the application for suspension of sentence may be accepted. It is moreso when applicants were on bail during trial.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence. It is stated that main allegation for causing offence is against Manoj @ Sonu. He is said to have beaten the deceased a day before the occurrence but the accusedappellants Soorajmal and Kailash Bai used to demand dowry from the deceased and her parents, thus rightly convicted for the offence. It is moreso when the accused have suppressed the genesis of occurrence. The prayer is accordingly not to suspend the sentence of accused appellants.

¶22

We have considered rival submissions of the parties and perused the material on record.

¶23

(3 of 3)

¶24

[SOSA-1262/2018]

¶25

Both the counsel have admitted that main allegation exists against Manoj @ Sonu for causing the occurrence. It is shown to be a case of suicide but nobody has seen the deceased hanging. In view of the above and as the deceased had received multiple injuries, which includes more than one ligature mark on the neck which cannot be otherwise caused in the case of hanging.

¶26

Taking into consideration the facts of this case, coupled with the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, we are inclined to grant the application for suspension of sentence without making comments on merits of the case at this stage, as it may cause prejudice to either of the parties while arguing the appeal finally, it is moreso when, the accused-applicant was on bail during trial.

¶27

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that sentence awarded to the accusedappellants (1) Soorajmal Son of Keshrilal and (2) Kailash Bai W/o Soorajmal by Special Judge, Baran in Sessions Case No. 34/2016 shall remain suspended during pendency of appeal and they be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- 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 12^th November, 2018 and whenever called upon to do so.

¶28

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

¶29

(M.N. BHANDARI),J

¶30

Monika/Gourav/72

Soorajmal S/O Keshrilal B/C Meghwal v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soorajmal S/O Keshrilal B/C Meghwal v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhobal Singh and Ors. Vs State

Abid Mohammad Qureshi and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Jagdish Kumar Bairwa Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp.

Bhawani Singh S/O Sh. Daya Ram B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Suresh @ Gittu S/O Late Naryan Ram B/C Mali Vs State of Rajasthan

Banti @ Irphan Ali S/O Shri Kurban Ali B/C Musalman Vs State of Rajasthan