Allowed

Ravi Prajapat v. State

Rajasthan HC12 Jan 2019SOSA/1058/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a suspension of sentence appeal, the High Court of Rajasthan allowed the application under Section 389 Cr.P.C., suspending the petitioner's sentence and releasing him on bail pending the appeal's final disposal, considering his age at the crime and lack of specific incriminating evidence.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended until final disposal of appeal; released on bail pending appearance conditions.

Ravi Prajapat Vs State — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 1058/2017 Ravi Prajapat S/o Shri Vishnu Prasad, B/c Kumhar, R/o Kumharon Ka Bass, Behind Bombay Dying, Nai Sadak, Police Station Sadar Bazar, Jodhpur Raj. Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Jodhpur

¶3

----Petitioner

¶4

		Versus
State Of Rajasthan
		----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. JPS Choudhary, P.P.
For complainant		Mr. P.N. Mohnani

¶5

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶6

Order

¶7

19/02/2019

¶8

The present application for suspension of sentence has come up before this Court on the order dated 11.12.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Criminal Appeal No. 2395-2399 of 2018 whereby, while setting aside the order dated 21.11.2017, remitted the matter back to this Court for fresh consideration and to dispose of the same on merits.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant while reiterating the arguments submits that there is no specific allegation against the appellant for inflicting injury by knife and only omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant. Further the prosecution has failed to come up with any motive or intention coupled with active participation of the present appellant applicant

¶10

(2 of 3)

¶11

[SOSA-1058/2017]

¶12

in the crime. It is also argued that the appellant applicant was on bail during the entire trial and at the time of alleged crime, he was at the age of adolescence, therefore, it is a fit case where the sentence awarded by the learned trial court should be suspended and appellant applicant be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application for suspension of sentence and submitted that appellant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

We have considered the rival arguments of the parties and perused the record. Upon perusal of statement of witnesses PW/1 Abrar Khan and PW/5 Dilip Bhati, it emerges that only omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and no specific role has been assigned to the appellant applicant. Further, two knives were recovered by the police; one from Akshya and another from Baldev and both being juvenile are already enlarged on bail. No recovery has been made from the present appellant applicant. Taking into consideration the age of the appellant applicant at the time of alleged crime coupled with the fact that the appellant applicant was on bail during the entire trial, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused appellant.

¶15

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the learned Addl. Distt & Sessions Judge No.4, Jodhpur Metropolitan vide judgment dated 27.09.2017 in Sessions Case

¶16

(3 of 3)

¶17

[SOSA-1058/2017]

¶18

No. 218/2012 (84/2010) against the appellant applicant Ravi Prajapat S/o Shri Vishnu Prasad, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 25.03.2019 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶19

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

¶20

That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶21

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

¶22

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant(s) was/were 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 purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said accused applicant(s) does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶23

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶24

Bjsh/-

¶25

(P.K. LOHRA),J

Ravi Prajapat v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Prajapat 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

State Vs Hanuman Ram and Anr.

Vijay Kumar Vs Sunita

Ramesh Kumar Choudhary Vs Rsrtc and Ors.

Anil Kumar Trivedi Vs State of Rajasthan