Allowed

Shankar @ Ratan Madan Lal v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Jan 2021SOSA/790/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur allowed a suspension of sentence application. The court suspended the sentences of two appellants convicted under IPC Sections 458 and 394/34 during the pendency of their appeal and granted bail upon execution of a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Sentences for Shankar and Raju were suspended till the disposal of the appeal, and they were released on bail upon execution of a personal bond with conditions.

Shankar @ Ratan Madan Lal Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc 3^rd Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 790/2020

¶3

Shankar @ Ratan @ Madan Lal S/o Shri Heera @ Ishwar Kalbeliya, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Arani, P.S. Rashmi, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.

¶4

Raju @ Rajiya @ Hoji S/o Shri Heera @ Ishwar Kalbeliya, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Arani, P.S. Rashmi, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan.

¶5

(Presently Lodged At District Jail Rajsamand).

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kaushal Sharma. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Aneesh Bhurat, PP.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

¶12

Order

¶13

15/01/2021

¶14

Heard learned counsel representing the applicants appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the impugned judgment and the material available on record.

¶15

The appellants applicants herein stand convicted for the offences under Sections 458 and 394/34 of the IPC vide judgment dated 31.01.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nathdwara, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No.13/2015 and have been sentenced to maximum imprisonment of eight years.

¶16

A perusal of the antecedent report placed on record, indicates that the appellant Raju was found involved in two cases registered in the year 2005 and 12 more cases including the

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[SOSA-790/2020]

¶19

present one in the year 2014. Learned counsel Shri Kaushal Sharma has placed on record a chart indicating that out of 14 cases registered against the appellant Raju till date, he stands acquitted in 10 whereas in few of the cases, he was released by shortening the sentence already undergone by him.

¶20

So far as the appellant Shankar is concerned, two cases including the present one have been registered against him till date. Shri Sharma submits that in another case registered against the appellant Shankar, he was appointed as Amicus Curiae under the Free Legal Aid Scheme and this, Court has reduced the sentences of the appellant Shankar to the period already undergone by him which is four and half years. In the present cases, the appellants are incarcerated in prison since long.

¶21

In view of the peculiar facts of the case and, considering the custodial period suffered by the appellants, and the bleak chances of an early disposal of the appeal, this Court considers it fit to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellants, during pendency of the appeal.

¶22

Accordingly, the instant third application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nathdwara, Rajsamand, vide judgment dated 31.01.2017 in Sessions Case No.13/2015 against the appellants-applicants (1) Shankar @ Ratan @ Madan Lal and (2) Raju @ Rajiya @ Hoji, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on bail, provided each of them executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 15.02.2021 and whenever ordered

¶23

(3 of 3)

¶24

[SOSA-790/2020]

¶25

to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated

¶26

below:-

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

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

¶30

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.

¶31

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J

¶32

9-Tikam/-

Shankar @ Ratan Madan Lal v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankar @ Ratan Madan Lal v. the State of Rajasthan

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

Kala Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Sohan and Ors. Vs Chatar Singh and Ors.

Dashrath Vs Lrs of Krishna Rao

Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Vs Laxmi Lal

Rajesh Vs Motilal Tak

Durga Lal Keer Vs State of Rajasthan