Allowed

Virma Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Apr 2023SOSA/1288/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the application for suspension of substantive sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C., releasing the appellant on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each subject to various attendance conditions until the appeal is disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Subjective sentence suspended; Appellant released on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Virma Ram Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/009020]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1288/2022

¶4

Virma Ram S/o Ranaji, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Samlathla Sirwal P.S. Bekariya Dist. Udaipur Raj. (At Present Lodged At Dist. Jail Sirohi)

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s)	:	Mr. D.K. Godara
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Anil Joshi, AAG assisted by
		Mr. Rajat Chhaparwal.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI

¶11

Order

¶12

06/04/2023

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentence.

¶14

The instant application for suspension of sentence has been preferred by the appellant-applicant, who has been convicted and sentenced by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi (for short ‘the trial court’) vide judgment dated 03.09.2022 in Sessions Case No.121/2019.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has argued that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicant vide impugned judgment. It is submitted that the complainant did not support the prosecution story, however, the trial court while convicting and sentencing the appellantapplicant has placed reliance on the evidence of P.W.3 - minor daughter of the deceased, but has ignored the fact that P.W.3, in

[2023/RJJD/009020]

[SOSA-1288/2022]

(2 of 3)

her cross-examination, has admitted that on the day of incident, her father reached home in a drunken stage and fell down and, thereafter, did not recover. It is also submitted that as per the prosecution story, the appellant-applicant had inflicted a blow on the head of the deceased with a stick, however, recovery of the said stick at the instance of the appellant-applicant is highly doubtful as the same was recovered from an open place. It is further submitted that the size of the stick is only about two feet and it is difficult to comprehend that by the said stick, the appellant-applicant had inflicted a fatal blow on the head of the deceased. It is also submitted that the appellant-applicant is in custody since 14.09.2019 and final hearing of the appeal is likely to take time.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence.

¶21

Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, after carefully scrutinizing the record of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, we consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant.

¶22

Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court vide judgment dated 03.09.2022 in Sessions Case No.121/2019 against appellant-applicant - Virma Ram S/o Ranaji shall remain suspended till final disposal of the appeal, provided he executes a

[2023/RJJD/009020]

[SOSA-1288/2022]

(3 of 3)

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 15.05.2023 and whenever ordered to do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶27

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

¶28

That if the appellant 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.

¶29

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

¶30

The learned trial court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accusedappellant 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶31

(RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J

¶32

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶33

15-nitin/-

Virma Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virma Ram 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

Jagram Vs State of Rajasthan

Shakti Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Puran Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rahul Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanjay @ Sandeep Vs State of Rajasthan

Suo-Moto Vs State of Rajasthan