Allowed

Meetha Lal @ Mithiya v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Jul 2023SOSA/630/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a second application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 CrPC. Relying on the fact that similarly situated co-accused were released by a coordinate bench, the court suspended the sentences and ordered the petitioner's release on bail subject to deposit of 50% fine and ensuring an appeal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Second application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 CrPC allowed; sentences suspended; appellant released on bail subject to deposit of 50% fine, personal bond, and attendance.

Meetha Lal @ Mithiya Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc 2^nd Suspension Of Sentence Application

¶3

(Appeal) No. 630/2023

¶4

Meetha Lal @ Mithiya S/o Laxman Vagariya, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Padasali, P.s. Kelwa, Dist. Rajsamand (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. JVS Deora For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶11

Order

¶12

03/07/2023

¶13

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

¶14

Counsel for the appellant submits that sentence of the similarly situated co-accused namely Mukesh Mogiya, Arjun Lal & Naru @ Narya @ Narayan has already been suspended by a coordinate Bench of this Court and they have been released on bail. Counsel submits that the case of the present appellant is similar to those of the co-accused, therefore, sentence of the appellant may kindly be suspended and he may be released on bail.

¶15

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for suspension of sentence.

¶16

Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant and having regard to the facts and circumstances

¶17

[SOSA-630/2023]

¶18

of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentences awarded to the accused appellant.

¶19

Accordingly, the second application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by learned Additional Session Judge No.4, District Udaipur vide judgment dated 14.01.2021 in Session Case No.67/2014 (497/2014) against the appellantapplicant Meetha Lal @ Mithiya S/o Laxman Vagariya shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to deposit 50% of the fine amount as imposed by the learned trial Court, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 08.08.2023 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated

¶20

below:-

¶21

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

¶22

That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶23

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

¶24

Appellant shall deposit 50% of the fine amount as imposed by the learned trial Court.

¶25

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered

¶26

[SOSA-630/2023]

¶27

(3 of 3)

¶28

as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant(s) was/were 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(s) does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶29

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶30

160-/-MS

Meetha Lal @ Mithiya v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meetha Lal @ Mithiya 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

Tararam Mali Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramesh Kumar Kuril Vs Kailash Chandra Dube

Pramod Bhaskar Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohan Lal Vs Punjab National Bank

Bmd Pvt. Lit. Vs State and Ors.

Baldev Vs State of Rajasthan