Dismissed

Suresh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Dec 2022SOSA/63/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order dismissing an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence. The appellant sought suspension pending appeal, alleging a false case and lack of evidence. The court rejected the plea, finding the facts and evidence unreliable for suspension.

What did the court decide?

Application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. dismissed. Sentence not suspended.

Suresh Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 63/2021

¶3

Suresh S/o Sh. Ratan Bheel, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Bheelon Ka Hunpada, Bachhkhera, P.s. Phuliakallan District Bhilwara. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Ajmer).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Singh Charan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶10

Order

¶11

06/12/2022

¶12

The instant application filed by the appellant under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.10.2019 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases No.2, Bhilwara in Sessions Case No.11/2019 (5/2019)

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that a false case has been foisted against the appellant just to wreak vengeance upon him. No incident as alleged has happened. He further submits that there is no concrete evidence regarding the fact that prosecutrix was below 18 years of age at the relevant point of time. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the evidence of subjecting the victim to rape is falsified. Learned counsel drew the attention of this Court towards the admission made by the prosecutrix in her deposition before the trial court in

¶14

(2 of 2)

¶15

[SOSA-63/2021]

¶16

which she admits that while playing with kids, she fell down on the earth and thus, blood oozed out from her private parts. The appellant is behind the bars since last four years, therefore, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant may be suspended as the hearing of the appeal will take long time.

¶17

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellant and urged that the fact of the prosecutrix being below the age of 15 years at the relevant time is conspicuous on the face of the record. The plea of false implication of the accused in this case is not sustainable in view of cogent and plausible explanation given by the prosecutrix during the trial.

¶18

Having regard to the submissions made and considering the facts, this Court is not inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellant.

¶19

Hence, the application for suspension of sentences is hereby dismissed.

¶20

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶21

118-Anshul/-

Suresh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh 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

Lrs of Harish Chandra Vs Smt. Ranjana

Chanchal Soni Vs Prakash

Amjad Khan Vs State

Naanga Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Sandhya Vs Jai Prakash Jain

Karnaram Vs State