Allowed

Narain Singh @ Narendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC25 Jul 2023SOSA/508/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court suspended the substantive sentence awarded to the appellant for abducting and sexually assaulting a minor pending the disposal of the appeal, provided the appellant executes a bond and adheres to specified conditions regarding attendance and address changes.

What did the court decide?

Substantive sentence suspended till final disposal of the appeal subject to bond and conditions.

Narain Singh @ Narendra Singh Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 508/2023

¶3

Narain Singh @ Narendra Singh S/o Sohan Singh Rawat, Aged About 20 Years, By Caste Rawat, Resident Of Pitha Ka Khera, Sendra Police Station, District Pali. (Lodged In District Jail, Udaipur)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Mithu Singh S/o Govind Singh, R/o Kaniyana Ps Devgarh Dist. Rajsamand

¶7

----Respondents

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. JVS Deora
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. RR Chhaparwal,PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

¶10

Order

¶11

25/07/2023

¶12

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

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has submitted that first application for suspension of sentence preferred on behalf of the applicant-appellant was rejected by this Court as not pressed vide order dated 03.03.2020 without arguing on merits.

¶14

It is argued that the allegation levelled against the appellantapplicant of abducting and sexually assaulting the minor victim is false. It is also submitted that the learned trial Court has erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicant vide impugned judgment though the prosecution has failed to produce cogent and reliable evidence to prove the guilt of the appellant-applicant.

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant while inviting our attention towards the evidence of PW-6 victim has submitted that it is clear that she eloped with the appellant-applicant on her own

¶16

[SOSA-508/2023]

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

free will and lived with him for about a month at different places. It is further submitted that the evidence produced by the prosecution in support of the allegations that at the time of incident, the victim was minor or less than 15 years of age, is also not reliable as the person, who has marked the date of birth of the victim in the school admission form has not been examined. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has further argued that the applicant is suffering incarceration for last more than eight and half years and there is every likelihood that the appeal filed by him will not be heard finally in the near future.

¶19

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

¶20

Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances 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 accused applicant-appellant.

¶21

Accordingly, the 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 learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Rajsamand vide judgment dated 16.1.2019 in Sessions Case No.22/2018 against applicant-appellant Narain Singh @ Narendra Singh V/o Sohan Singh shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, provided he executes a 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 25.08.2023 and whenever ordered to do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶22

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

¶23

(3 of 3) [SOSA-508/2023]

¶24

That if the applicant-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.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J

¶28

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶29

37-/-arti

Narain Singh @ Narendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narain Singh @ Narendra Singh 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

Manish Raj Vs Master Abhyoday

Ratna Ram Vs All Resident of Village Jinrasar

Master Abyuday (Abhyuday) Vs Manish Raj

M/S. Shreenath Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Rajasthan

Harlal Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Kumar Salvi Vs the State of Rajasthan