Allowed

Rustam Khan v. State

Rajasthan HC23 Aug 2018SOSA/446/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an S.B.S. appeal, the High Court at Jodhpur allowed the second application for suspension of sentence under Cr.P.C. 389, directing the Special Judge at Sri Ganganagar to release the appellant on bail pending the disposal of his appeal against conviction for offences under IPC 450 and IPC 376.

What did the court decide?

Application for suspension of sentence allowed; appellant to be released on bail of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties pending disposal of the appeal.

Rustam Khan Vs State — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 446/2018

¶3

¶4

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1750 / 2017

¶5

Rustam Khan S/o Hasham Khan @ Hasan Khan, B/c Musalman, R/o Chak 3 Shpd Police Station Suratgarh, Sadar, Presently R/o Ward No. 1, Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar. Sub-Jail Suratgarh Dist. Sriganganagar.

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pankaj Gupta. For Respondent(s) : Mr. O.P. Rathi, Public Prosecutor.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA

¶12

Order

¶13

23/08/2018

¶14

Appellant-applicant has preferred this application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for seeking suspension of sentence awarded by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Sri Ganganagar (for short, ‘learned trial Court’) by its judgment dated 26^th of September, 2017. The learned trial Court by the impugned order has indicted appellant-applicant for offence under 450 IPC and handed down sentence of rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs.10,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to undergo sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. Likewise, the learned trial Court has also convicted appellantapplicant for offence under Section 376(1) IPC and handed down sentence of rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[SOSA-446/2018]

¶17

Rs.50,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to undergo sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicant as well as learned Public Prosecutor on this second application for suspension of sentence.

¶19

After hearing learned counsel for the appellant-applicant as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perusal of the impugned judgment and the entire record of the case in conjunction with the statements of prosecutrix-PW2 and another witness PW5, in my opinion, learned trial Court has not made endeavor to appreciate prosecution evidence appropriately.

¶20

In view thereof, this second application for suspension of sentence is allowed.

¶21

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Sri Ganganagar, vide judgment dated 26.09.2017, in Sessions Case No.86/2015 against appellantapplicant Rustam Khan S/o Hasham Khan @ Hasan Khan, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to the condition that he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 24.09.2018 and whenever ordered to do so till disposal of the appeal, on the conditions indicated

(3 of 3)

[SOSA-446/2018]

below:-

That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

¶26

That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶27

Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

¶28

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accusedapplicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purposes relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said accused-applicant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶29

Twinkle Singh/124

Rustam Khan v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rustam Khan v. State

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

M/S Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd. Vs N.H.A.I. and Anr.

Mukesh Vs State

M/S Mahima Mine and Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Vs N.H.A.I and Anr.

Gurbhej Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Thavarchand and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Yatendra Sharma Vs Kunji Lal Meena and Ors.