Allowed

Kukki @ Kanwar Bahadur S/O Nandlal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 Apr 2023SOSA/323/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed suspension of sentence applications filed by multiple accused. The court noted cross-FIRs, injuries on both sides, conviction under Section 149 IPC, and that specific injuries causing death were assigned to others, permitting the suspension pending bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Sentences suspended upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the Trial Court.

Kukki @ Kanwar Bahadur S/O Nandlal Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

(1) D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 323/2023

¶3

¶4

D.B. Criminal Appeal No.18/2023

¶5

Kukki @ Kanwar Bahadur S/o Nandlal, Resident Of Gularghata, Police Station Kotwali, Karauli District Karauli (At Present Confined In Central Jail Sevar Bharatpur)

¶6

Rajendra S/o Nandlal, Resident Of Gularghata, Police Station Kotwali, Karauli District Karauli (At Present Confined In Central Jail Sevar Bharatpur)

¶7

Rishi S/o Kukki @ Kanwar Bahadur, Resident Of Gularghata, Police Station Kotwali, Karauli District Karauli (At Present Confined In Central Jail Sevar Bharatpur)

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

(2) D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 304/2023

¶13

¶14

D.B. Criminal Appeal No.4/2023

¶15

Tufan Singh Son Of Sarvan, Resident Of Gularghata, Police Station Kotwali Karauli, District Karauli (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Sevar Bharatpur).

¶16

Chor Singh Son Of Dharmi, Resident Of Gularghata, Police Station Kotwali Karauli, District Karauli (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Sevar Bharatpur).

¶17

Jal Singh Son Of Khemu, Resident Of Gularghata, Police Station Kotwali Karauli, District Karauli (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Sevar Bharatpur).

¶18

Ramdayal @ Dayal Son Of Moti, Resident Of Gularghata, Police Station Kotwali Karauli, District Karauli (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Sevar Bharatpur).

¶19

Dharmi Son Of Heera, Resident Of Gularghata, Police Station Kotwali Karauli, District Karauli (Rajasthan)

¶20

(2 of 3)

¶21

[SOSA-323/2023]

¶22

(Presently Confined In Central Jail, Sevar Bharatpur).

¶23

----Petitioners

¶24

Versus

¶25

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶26

----Respondent

¶27

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Tarun Jain, Adv.
	Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, Adv.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Javed Choudhary, AGA.
	Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadoun, Adv. with
	Mr. Akash Saraswat, Adv.

¶28

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

¶29

Order

¶30

18/04/2023

¶31

Accused-applicants have preferred these applications for suspension of sentence.

¶32

Heard on applications for suspension of sentence.

¶33

It is contended by counsel for the applicants that all the accused who are before this Court in the present suspension of sentence applications have been convicted with the aid of Section 149 IPC. Injuries which have resulted into demise of deceased were assigned to Lalit and Revati. It is also contended that there is cross FIR between the parties and various persons have been injured from applicant side as well. Nine persons have been convicted at the side of the complainant because of head injury assigned to Lalit and Rewati. It is a case of free fight. It is further contended that accused-applicants were on bail during trial

¶34

Learned counsel for the complainant and learned Additional Government Advocate have opposed the suspension of sentence

¶35

[SOSA-323/2023]

¶36

(3 of 3)

¶37

application. It is contended that petitioners were the aggressors and one person has died on their side.

¶38

We have considered the contentions.

¶39

Considering the fact that there is cross FIR ; injuries have been sustained at both sides; accused-applicants have been convicted with the aid of Section 149 IPC; injuries resulting into death of deceased was assigned to Lalit and Revati, we deem it proper to allow the applications for suspension of sentence.

¶40

Accordingly, both these applications for suspension of sentence are allowed.

¶41

It is ordered that the sentence awarded to accused-applicants in Sessions Case No.70/2020 shall remain suspended if the accused-applicants furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- each and two sureties of Rs.50,000/- 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.

¶42

A copy of this order be separately placed in connected matter.

¶43

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J

¶44

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶45

Keshav/17 & 19

Kukki @ Kanwar Bahadur S/O Nandlal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kukki @ Kanwar Bahadur S/O Nandlal 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

Latif S/O Shri Babu Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Pramod Yadav S/O Shri Jawahar Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan

Raghuveer S/O Shri Prahlad Vs State of Rajasthan

Sangram Singh S/O Shri Radheshyam @ Tunda Sahariya Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh Kumar S/O Rameshwar Vs State of Rajasthan

Rakesh Kumar Ghoshliya Son of Shri Girdhari Lal Vs State of Rajasthan