Allowed

Gyarsi Lal S/O Kalu Ram B/C Meena v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC20 May 2020SOSA/195/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a suspension of sentence application filed by convicted appellants during the pendency of their criminal appeal. The order suspended the sentence and granted bail subject to the Trial Court's satisfaction, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; sentence suspended; admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of Trial Court.

Gyarsi Lal S/O Kalu Ram B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D. B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.

¶3

195/2020

¶4

¶5

D. B. Criminal Appeal No. 459/2019

¶6

Gyarsi Lal Son of Kalu Ram,

¶7

Sukhdev Son of Govinda Meena,

¶8

Lallu Ram S/o Gyarsi Lal, All residents of Dhani Medawali Ramgarh Pachwara, Police Station Nangal Rajavtan, at present Police Station Ramgarh Pachwara, District Dausa (Raj.) (At Present in District Jail, Dausa

¶9

----Accused/Appellants

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State of Rajasthan, through P.P.

¶12

----Respondent

¶13

For Appellant	: Mr. Sudhir Kumar Jain with Mr. Ravindra Singh Shekhawat through Video Conferencing.
For Respondent	: Mr. N.S. Gurjar, Public Prosecutor.
For Complainant	: Mr. S.N. Meena through Video Conferencing.

¶14

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

¶15

Order

¶16

20/05/2020

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants/appellants were on bail during trial. Injury on the head of the deceased is attributed to Applicant No. 2 Sukhdev, who is aged about 81 years. Injury on the head of the deceased has been opined to be caused by blunt weapon, whereas, Applicant No. 2 was armed with an axe at the time of incident.

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[SOSA 195/2020]

¶20

Hence, at the most it can be said that the weapon was used not from the sharp side but from the blunt side. It is a case of version and cross-version. In the cross-version, complainant party in the present case, has been convicted and sentenced by the trial court. Post conviction, applicants/appellants are in custody for the last about six months.

¶21

Learned State Counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the application.

¶22

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and expedient to suspend the sentence of the applicants during the pendency of the appeal.

¶23

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, application is allowed. Sentence of the applicants shall remain suspended during the pendency of the appeal. Applicants be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶24

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J

¶25

(SABINA),J

¶26

MANOJ NARWANI /7

Gyarsi Lal S/O Kalu Ram B/C Meena v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyarsi Lal S/O Kalu Ram B/C Meena 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

Tejmal Meena S/O Shri Hanutaram Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Raju S/O Ranjeet Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Sunita W/O Late Shri Gordhan @ Gordhan Soni Vs the State of Rajasthan

Jain Singh Prajapat S/O Shri Bhori Lal Prajapat Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ramchandra Singh S/O Shri Sardar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra S/O Shri Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan