Allowed

Birdhilal S/O Ramchandra v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Apr 2023SOSA/894/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the applicant's suspension of sentence application. The bench considered the length of custody, the time required for appeal disposal, and issues regarding witness credibility and location as reasons to suspend the sentence upon furnishing a bond and sureties to the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended contingent upon the applicant furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the trial court to appear as called upon.

Birdhilal S/O Ramchandra Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/007656]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 894/2022

¶4

¶5

D.B. Criminal Appeal No.54/2022

¶6

Birdhilal S/o Ramchandra, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Bamuliya Jogiyan, Police Station Anta, District Baran (Rajasthan) (Presently In Central Jail At Kota)

¶7

----Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, through PP

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Gurjar, AGA

¶12

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

¶13

Order

¶14

21/04/2023

¶15

Accused/applicant has preferred this suspension of sentence application.

¶16

Heard on application for suspension of sentence.

¶17

It is contended by counsel for the applicant that Court below has placed reliance on the statement of Murlidhar. As far as other witnesses are concerned, Court below has not considered them to be sterling witness. It is also contended that house of the deceased was not adjacent to the place of occurrence as observed by the Court below. It is also contended that the possibility that Murlidhar had seen the incident is remote. Applicant has remained in custody for a period of four years and ten months. Disposal of appeal is bound to take time.

[2023/RJJP/007656]

[SOSA-894/2022]

(2 of 2)

Learned AGA has opposed the application for suspension of sentence.

¶22

Considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the applicant, as also the fact that house of the witness-Murlidhar is not adjacent to the place of occurrence; applicant has remained in custody for about five years; disposal of appeal is bound to take time, we deem it proper to allow the application for suspension of sentence.

¶23

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed. It is ordered that the sentence awarded to accusedapplicant in Sessions Case No. 02/2019 (CIS No.03/2019) shall remain suspended if the applicant furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court to the effect that he shall appear before this Court as and when called upon to do so.

¶24

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J

¶25

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶26

CHANDAN /10

Birdhilal S/O Ramchandra v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birdhilal S/O Ramchandra 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

Faren Singh Son of Johari Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Vijay @ Vijay Singh Son of Bhanwar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Basant Lal Son of Jwala Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Hariram Meena S/O Shri Bhagwan Sahay Vs the State of Rajasthan

Mangi Lal S/O Shri Bherulal Vs State of Rajasthan