Dismissed

Vishal Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Mar 2023SOSA/559/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the appellant's second application for suspension of sentence. The Court held that the heinous nature of the offence against a four-year-old child warranted no indulgence, observing no direct evidence existed but maintaining the severity of the conviction.

What did the court decide?

The second suspension of sentence application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.

Vishal Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/006527]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 559/2021

¶4

Vishal Kumar S/o Sh. Natwar Lal, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Harijan Basti, Kuchaman City, P.s. Kuchaman City, District Nagaur. (Lodged At Central Jail Ajmer).

----Appellant

Versus

State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For appellant(s)	: Mr. Natwar	Lal, appellant’s father
	Mrs. Uganta	Tak, appellant’s sister
	(present in	person)

¶10

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶11

Order

¶12

13/03/2023

¶13

The lawyers are abstaining from work.

¶14

The appellant’s father and sister, present in person, submit that the appellant has undergone the prolonged custody. They also submit that there is no direct evidence of the alleged crime.

¶15

This Court finds that the appellant was convicted under Section 342 & 376AB of the IPC and was ordered to undergo imprisonment for one year and 20 years respectively, along with fine stipulations.

¶16

This Court also observes that the prosecutrix/victim, on the date of commission of the allege crime, was aged four years only and was studying in School; thus, looking into such aspects, the offence committed by the appellant is heinous in nature and the same does not warrant any kind of indulgence at this stage.

¶17

(2 of 2) [SOSA-559/2021]

¶18

[2023/RJJD/006527]

¶19

Consequently, this second suspension of sentence application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

¶20

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

¶21

92-Zeeshan

Vishal Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Kumar 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

N Vs State of Rajasthan

Choti Devi Memorial Shikshan Sansthan Vs State of Rajasthan

Balaji Nursing Institute Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohammad Ishaq Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhupendra Singh @ Bhinder Vs State of Rajasthan

Shri Laxmi Kant Vs State of Rajasthan