Allowed

Mangi Lal S/O Shri Bherulal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Apr 2023SOSA/1071/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the suspension of sentence application filed by the accused-appellant before the High Court, Rajasthan (Jaipur). Considering the prolonged period of custody and the appellant's age, the court suspended the sentence subject to the furnishing of a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The suspension of sentence application is allowed; sentence suspended subject to personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each.

Mangi Lal S/O Shri Bherulal Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/007685]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1071/2022

¶4

¶5

D.B. Criminal Appeal No.104/2019

¶6

Mangi Lal S/o Shri Bherulal, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Dhanoda Kalan, Police Station Sarola Kalan, District Jhalawar Raj. (At Present In Central Jail Kota)

¶7

----Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Rawat, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Javed Choudhary, AGA

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

¶13

Order

¶14

21/04/2023

¶15

Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that victim has been intimated about filing of the appeal as well as Suspension of Sentence Application.

¶16

No one has put in appearance on behalf of the victim.

¶17

Accused-applicant has preferred this application for suspension of sentence.

¶18

Heard on application for suspension of sentence.

¶19

It is contended by counsel for the applicant that the applicant has remained in custody for a period of about 8 years. Applicant is around 60 years of age. The weapon which was recovered by the Police was not found blood stained and his

[2023/RJJP/007685]

[SOSA-1071/2022]

(2 of 2)

clothes were not recovered. There are material contradictions in the statement of the witnesses.

¶24

Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the suspension of sentence application.

¶25

We have considered the contentions.

¶26

Considering the contentions of learned counsel for the applicant; also taking note of the period of custody and the age of the accused and the possibility of the appeal being taken up for hearing at an earlier date being remote, we deem it proper to allow the application for suspension of sentence.

¶27

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed. It is ordered that the sentence awarded to accused-applicant in Sessions Case No.26/2017, shall remain suspended if the accused-applicant furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court to the effect that he shall appear before this Court as and when called upon to do so.

¶28

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J

¶29

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶30

Keshav/11

Mangi Lal S/O Shri Bherulal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangi Lal S/O Shri Bherulal 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

Faren Singh Son of Johari Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Vijay @ Vijay Singh Son of Bhanwar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Basant Lal Son of Jwala Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Hariram Meena S/O Shri Bhagwan Sahay Vs the State of Rajasthan

Birdhilal S/O Ramchandra Vs State of Rajasthan