Allowed

Peetam Singh Son of Bhagwant v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Sept 2023SOSA/1278/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court allowed a suspension of sentence application filed by accused petitioners. Considering their six-year custody and parity with a co-accused, the court ordered sentence suspension upon furnishing personal and surety bonds.

What did the court decide?

Sentence awarded in Sessions Case No. 14/2017 shall remain suspended if a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each are furnished.

Peetam Singh Son of Bhagwant Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:23320-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1278/2023

¶4

¶5

D.B. Criminal Appeal No.149/2021

¶6

Peetam Singh Son Of Bhagwant, Resident Of Village Tilaooa, Police Station, Nadanpur, District Dholpur (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Sewar, District Bharatpur)

¶7

Ganesh S/o Peetam Singh, Resident Of Village Tilaooa, Police Station, Nadanpur, District Dholpur (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Sewar, District Bharatpur)

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Imran Khan, Dy. GA Mr. Kapil Gupta, Adv.

¶13

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

¶14

Order

¶15

15/09/2023

¶16

Accused/applicants have preferred this suspension of sentence application.

¶17

Heard on suspension of sentence application.

¶18

It is contended by counsel for the applicants that applicants have remained in custody for a period of six years and nine months. Sentence of co-accused has been suspended by the Court. Disposal of appeal is bound to take time.

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[2023:RJ-JP:23320-DB]

¶21

[SOSA-1278/2023]

¶22

Learned Dy. GA and counsel for the complainant have opposed the suspension of sentence application. It is contended by counsel for the complainant that axe and baka were recovered from the applicants. Kashiram is the eye witness who has narrated the incident.

¶23

We have considered the contentions.

¶24

Looking to the custody period and the fact that sentence of co-accused has been suspended by the Court; their case is on parity; disposal of appeal is bound to take time, we deem it proper to allow the suspension of sentence application.

¶25

Accordingly, the suspension of sentence application is allowed. It is ordered that the sentence awarded to accusedapplicants in Sessions Case No. 14/2017 shall remain suspended if the applicants furnish a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lac Only) and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court to the effect that they shall appear before this Court as and when called upon to do so.

¶26

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J

¶27

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶28

CHANDAN /7

Peetam Singh Son of Bhagwant v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Peetam Singh Son of Bhagwant 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

State of Raj. Vs Mahesh Kumar @ Kallu

Mohan Bamne @ Salim Son of Ganesh Bamne Vs State of Rajasthan

Hardeen Son of Shri Kalla Vs State of Rajasthan

Avendra Kumar Bhardwaj S/O Bharmanand Bhardwaj Vs Kamlesh Kumar Sharma S/O Late Satyanarayan

Durgalal S/O Shri Bansilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Rafique S/O Suleman Khan B/C Kasai Musalman Vs State of Rajasthan Thjrough Pp