High Court of Rajasthan heard suspension of sentence applications against two appellants convicted of murder. Court rejected bail for one accused based on proven conspiracy but granted it to the other due to doubtful evidence of involvement.
Suspension of sentence allowed for Mustafa; application rejected for Rosham Khan.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 304/2022
IN
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 129/2021
Rosham Khan S/o Ameen Khan Musalman, Aged About 54 Years,
R/o Akehpur, P.s. Pratapgarh, Dist. Pratapgarh. (Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Udaipur).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
connected with
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 305/2022
IN
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 138/2021
Mustafa S/o Mehmood Khan Pathan, Aged About 45 Years, B/c Musalman, R/o Nauganva, P.s. Arnod, District Pratapgarh. (Presently Lodged At District Central Jail, Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. |
J.S. Choudhary, Sr. Advocate |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Mr. |
Pradeep Choudhary Ravinder Kumar Charan |
|
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. |
Mansoor Ahmed Siddiqui, AAG |
| Mr. | B.R. Bishnoi, PP |
(2 of 4)
HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS
Order
19/05/2022
Heard on application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed by the appellants Rosham Khan and Mustafa.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants in these appeals would submit that the conviction of two appellants has been ordered without there being reliable evidence of appellants involved in the alleged conspiracy of the murder of deceased. He would further submit that the reliance placed on the evidence of PW-5, wife of the brother of deceased and PW-29, wife of deceased falls short of clinching evidence of proof of conspiracy from established circumstances and therefore only on that basis, conviction could not be ordered.
It is further submitted that the other co-accused, whose cases are similarly situated as the present appellants namely, Prem Mohan, Gulam Abas and Bablu have been granted bail by suspending their sentences. The appellants were on bail during the trial therefore their application for suspension of sentence may be allowed.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that as far as Rosham Khan is concerned, there is overwhelming evidence led by the prosecution witnesses, particularly, PW-5 and PW-29 who have deposed that right from the beginning in the matter of transaction relating to involvement in property, the appellant Rosham Khan was involved and was party to such agreement and out of that agreement only, certain dispute of payment arose. He would also submit that there is
(3 of 4)
evidence on record to show that Rosham Khan had administered threat of life to deceased 15 days before the date of incident.
As far as Mustafa is concerned, learned counsel for the State would submit that his involvement is based on seizure of motorcycle from him and what has been stated by other prosecution witnesses.
Taking into consideration, the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and particularly, taking into consideration the evidence on the basis of which inference of conspiracy has been drawn by the learned trial Court regarding involvement in the conspiracy of appellant Rosham Khan, we are not inclined to grant bail and therefore his application is rejected.
However, taking into consideration that involvement of appellant Mustafa is based mainly on recovery of motorcycle but that motorcycle, even according to the prosecution is not alleged to have been used in the commission of offence by two other accused/shooters and except this, the evidence of the prosecution with regard to involvement of Mustafa appears to be doubtful insofar as settlement proceedings and administration of threat is concerned, we are inclined to allow the application for suspension of sentence of Mustafa.
In the result, application for suspension of sentence of Rosham Khan is rejected and the application for suspension of sentence of Mustafa is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive jail sentence awarded to the appellant Mustafa S/o Mehmood Khan Pathan is suspended and he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- along with two local sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his appearance before the concerned trial Court on
(4 of 4)
11.07.2022 and on all such further dates as may be directed by the said Court, interval being not less than one year, during the pendency of the appeal.
List the appeals for final hearing.
(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J
(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACJ
34,35-jayesh/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether suspension of sentence and bail should be granted to Rosham Khan and Mustafa.
Whether evidence of conspiracy is sufficient to deny bail to Rosham Khan.
Rosham Khan
Mustafa
State Of Rajasthan
Madan Gopal Vyas
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
