Allowed

Kunal Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Apr 2022SOSA/576/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Rajasthan suspended the five-year sentence imposed on Kunal Singh for IPC Section 386 read with Section 114 crimes under Section 389 CrPC to allow pending appeal hearing, maintaining bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended during pendency of appeal; appellant released on bail with personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, conditioned to appear before trial court and notify add

Kunal Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 576/2021

¶3

Kunal Singh S/o Narendra Pal Singh Tanwar, Aged About 23 Years, Thikariya Balaji, P.s. Thoi, Dist. Sikar. At Present 33 Jagdamba Nagar-Ii, New Loha Mandi Road No. 14, Vki Area, Jaipur P.s. Murlipura, Jaipur. (At Present Lodged In District Jail, Bhilwara).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. I.R. Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶10

Order

¶11

08/04/2022

¶12

The instant application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the appellantapplicant Kunal Singh S/o Narendra Pal Singh Tanwar, who has been convicted for the offence under Section 386 r.w. Section 114 of the IPC and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to under further three months rigorous imprisonment vide the judgment dated 18.08.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocitiy Cases), Bhilwara in Sessions Case No.05/2020.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶14

(2 of 4)

¶15

[SOSA-576/2021]

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant submits that the findings arrived at by the learned trial Court and consequently the order of the sentence passed by the trial Court is not sustainable in eye of law, as the learned trial Court has miserably failed to appreciate the correct, legal and factual aspect of the matter. It is further submitted that the evidence adduced by the prosecution is not sufficient enough to bring home the guilt of the applicantappellant for the offence under Section 386 r.w. Section 114 of the IPC. It is further submitted that the applicant-appellant has been convicted under Section 386 r.w. Section 114 of the IPC only and has been ordered to suffer maximum five years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10,000/-. The applicant-appellant remained on bail during trial and he never misused the liberty so granted in his favour. He is behind the Bars since 18.08.2021. The applicant-appellant is ready to furnish bail bonds as per directions of this Court and would be abided by the conditions, if any, imposed by this Court. Hearing of the appeal would likely to take a long time thus, he craves that the application for suspension of sentences filed on behalf of the applicant-appellant be accepted.

¶17

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently and fervently opposed the bail plea while contending that learned trial Court has not erred in convicting and sentencing the applicantappellant in passing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, which is well reasoned and thus, requires no interference by this Court.

¶18

Considering the submissions advanced at Bar by the learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case as also looking to the fact that

¶19

(3 of 4)

¶20

[SOSA-576/2021]

¶21

the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to suffer five years rigorous imprisonment only, he was on bail during trial and he remained in custody for nearly ten months and now the hearing of appeal would likely to take a long time thus, without commenting on the merits of the case this stage, this court is of the view that it is a fit case for grant of indulgence of bail to the appellantapplicant by suspending the sentences awarded to him by the trial court during the pendency of the appeal.

¶22

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the learned SC/St (Prevention of Atrocitiy Cases), Bhilwara vide judgment dated 18.08.2021 in Sessions Case No.05/2020 against the appellant-applicant Kunal Singh S/o Narendra Pal Singh Tanwar 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 09.05.2022 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶23

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

¶24

That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶25

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

¶26

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be

¶27

(4 of 4)

¶28

[SOSA-576/2021]

¶29

registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant was 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 does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶30

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶31

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J

¶32

27-Mamta/-

Kunal Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunal Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Haw Devi Balar Vs Income Tax Officer

Navratan @ Noratmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Imran Rafeeq Vs Abhilasha Jain

Deva Vs State

Geetesh Khanna Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ramanand Vs State