Allowed

Deenu @ Deen Mohammed Son of Shri Chahat Khan, by Caste Mev v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2019SOSA/12/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the suspension of sentence application filed by appellants against a suspended sentence in Sessions Case No.17/2018. Relief was granted contingent upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Application for suspension of sentence allowed; personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to be furnished to the trial Court.

Deenu @ Deen Mohammed Son of Shri Chahat Khan, by Caste… — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application

¶3

No.12/2019

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 16/2019

¶6

Deenu @ Deen Mohammed Son Of Shri Chahat Khan, By Caste Mev, R/o Taju Ka Baas Tan Mirjapur Ps Kishangarhbas District Alwar.

¶7

Lallu Alias Khajju Son Of Shri Chahat Khan, By Caste Mev, R/o Taju Ka Baas Tan Mirjapur Ps Kishangarhbas District Alwar.

¶8

Shahida Son Of Shri Shyodan Khan, By Caste Mev, R/o Taju Ka Baas Tan Mirjapur Ps Kishangarhbas District Alwar.

¶9

Sher Mohammed Son Of Shri Chahat Khan, By Caste Mev, R/o Taju Ka Baas Tan Mirjapur Ps Kishangarhbas District Alwar.

¶10

Vahida Son Of Shri Shyodan Khan, By Caste Mev, R/o Taju Ka Baas Tan Mirjapur Ps Kishangarhbas District Alwar.

¶11

----Appellants

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jaswant Singh Rathore for Mr. Harendra Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, PP

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶17

Judgment / Order

¶18

09/01/2019

¶19

Heard on application for suspension of sentence.

¶20

(2 of 2)

¶21

[SOSA-12/2019]

¶22

It is contended by counsel for the appellants that the sentence imposed is three years which is already suspended by the Court below.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence.

¶24

Considering the contention of counsel for the appellants, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed.

¶25

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed. It is ordered that the sentence awarded to accusedappellants in Sessions Case No.17/2018 CIS No.101/2014 shall remain suspended if the appellants furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court to the effect that they shall appear before this Court as and when called upon to do so.

¶26

Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court by fax/email today itself with a direction to serve a photostat copy of the same to the appellant/s and an additional copy of this order be also sent to the concerned Court by ordinary process.

¶27

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J.

¶28

Arti/78

Deenu @ Deen Mohammed Son of Shri Chahat Khan, by Caste Mev v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deenu @ Deen Mohammed Son of Shri Chahat Khan, by Caste Mev v. State of Rajasthan

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

Smt. Savitri Devi Vs State and Ors.

Rajesh Arora and Ors. Vs State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors.

Anubhav Ajmani and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Sona (Sonu) Bai D/O Shanti Lal B/C Brahmin Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajesh S/O Ramjilal B/C Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Hardev Joshi @ Pappu S/O Shri Devilal B/C Brahman Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp