Allowed

Gurpeet Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 Dec 2023SOSA/887/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court suspended the life imprisonment and other sentences awarded to two appellants in a murder case pending the final disposal of their appeal, directing them to execute a personal bond with sureties and appear before the trial court annually.

What did the court decide?

Sentence passed by Sessions Judge dated 03.07.2023 in Sessions Case No.35/2017 suspended till final disposal of appeal subject to execution of personal bond and conditions.

Gurpeet Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 887/2023

¶3

Gurpeet Singh S/o Kaku Singh @ Swaroop Singh, Aged About 30 Years, 20 Gg, P.s. Chunawadh Dist. Sriganganagar. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Sri Ganganagar).

¶4

Gurlal Singh S/o Balvinder Singh @ Palvinder Singh, Aged About 37 Years, Dhakawali, Dhani Chak 1G Chhoti, P.s. Sadar, Dist. Sriganganagar. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Sriganganagar).

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Vikas K. Bishnoi for
	Mr. Rakesh Matoria
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. R. R. Chhaparwal,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

¶11

Judgment / Order

¶12

07/12/2023

¶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-applicants, who have been convicted and sentenced by the Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar vide judgment dated 03.07.2023 in Sessions Case No.35/2017. The appellant-applicants have been sentenced as under :-

¶15

(2 of 5)

¶16

[SOSA-887/2023]

¶17

Offence U/s	Sentence	Fine	Sentence in default
			ofpayment of fine
302/149 IPC	Life Imprisonment	Rs.5,000/-	Two Months’ S.I.
147 IPC	Six Months’ S.I.	Rs.500/-	One Month’s S.I.
325 &	Three Years’	Rs.1000/-	One Month’s S.I.
325/149 IPC	S.I.
323 IPC	One Year’s S.I.	Rs.200/-	15 Days’ S.I.

¶18

Learned counsel for the appellant-applicants has argued that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicants for the offence under Section 302/149 IPC. Learned counsel has submitted that daughter of one of the coaccused namely Mewa Singh solemnized marriage with the brother of complainant P.W.-1 Gurpreet Singh against the wishes of her family and on account of that, there were some dispute between the two families. It is contended that the daughter of accused Mewa Singh namely Sakina Kaur gave birth to a child on the date of incident and as per the complainant party, when they were celebrating the said birth, the appellant-applicants along with other co-accused persons came in front of the house of deceased Sukhchain Singh and assaulted the deceased and the other family members.

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellant-applicants has submitted that the deceased received only one fatal injury on his head and the same has been assigned to co-accused Arjun Singh. It is further submitted that omnibus allegations have been levelled against the appellant-applicants and no specific role has been

¶20

(3 of 5) [SOSA-887/2023]

¶21

assigned to them. It is submitted that as a matter of fact, it was a case of free fight, in which, the accused persons namely - Mewa Singh, Arjun Singh and Gurpreet Singh son of Kaku Singh @ Swaroop Singh have also received injuries.

¶22

Learned counsel has further submitted that from the injury reports (Exhibit P/41 and P/43), it is clear that the injury on the body of complainant Gurpreet Singh son of Sukhchain Singh is simple in nature, whereas injury on the left forearm of Smt. Devendra Kaur is only grievous. Learned counsel has further submitted that as a matter of fact, the appellant-applicants had no intention to kill the deceased and the incident took place on account of sudden reaction without any preparation. Learned counsel has also submitted that the appellant-applicants were on bail during trial and hearing of the appeal is likely to take time. It is, thus, prayed that the sentence awarded to the appellantapplicants by the trial court may be suspended.

¶23

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

¶24

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties; after going through the statement of the prosecution witnesses i.e. P.W.-1 Gurpreet Singh, P.W.-2 Tarsem Singh, P.W.-3 Ranjeet Singh, P.W.-4 Darbara Singh, P.W.-5 Beekar Singh and P.W.-6 Smt. Devendra Kaur; taking into consideration the fact that there is only one injury on the head of the deceased, which as per the complainant was inflicted by co-accused Arjun Singh and the other persons have not received injury, which is dangerous to life, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we are inclined

¶25

(4 of 5) [SOSA-887/2023]

¶26

to suspend the sentence awarded to the appellant-applicants.

¶27

Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar vide judgment dated 03.07.2023 in Sessions Case No.35/2017 against appellant-applicants - Gurpeet Singh S/o Kaku Singh @ Swaroop Singh and Gurlal Singh S/o Balvinder Singh @ Palvinder Singh shall remain suspended till final disposal of the appeal, provided each of them executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance in this Court on 22.1.2024 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶28

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

¶29

That if the appellants change the place of residence, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶30

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

¶31

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-appellants in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-appellants were tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc.

¶32

[SOSA-887/2023]

¶33

(5 of 5)

¶34

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-appellants do not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶35

(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J

¶36

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶37

43-DivyaTak/-

Gurpeet Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurpeet 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

Heera Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Rameshwar Lal Jat Vs the State of Rajasthan

Omprakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Dev Vs State of Rajasthan

Rai Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kishna Ram Vs State of Rajasthan