Allowed

Lakhmaram @ Laxman Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Nov 2023SOSA/898/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed a suspension of sentence application filed by appellants convicted of murder. Considering they remained on bail during the trial, the court granted suspension until appeal disposal subject to personal bonds and court appearance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Substantive sentence suspended till final disposal of appeal; applicants to execute personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Lakhmaram @ Laxman Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:37031-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 898/2023

¶4

Lakhmaram @ Laxman Kumar S/o Shri Ramaram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Jeerawal, Police Station Rodar, District Sirohi.

¶5

Karsan @ Krishan Kumar S/o Dhanaramji, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Jeerawal, Police Station Reodar, District Sirohi. (Lodged in District Jail Jodhpur)

¶6

----Applicants

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan through the Public Prosecutor

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Applicant(s) : Mr. Richin Surana For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, P.P.

¶11

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

¶12

Order

¶13

01/11/2023

¶14

1. This suspension of sentence application has been preferred on behalf of the applicant-appellants, who have been convicted and sentenced by the Sessions Judge, Sirohi (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the trial court’) in Sessions Case No.6/2019 (CIS No.6/2019) vide judgment dated 12.07.2023. The applicant-applicants have been sentenced as under :-

¶15

Offences	Sentence	Fine	Sentence
U/S		(in Rs.)	(in default of payment of fine)
302 IPC	Life Imprisonment	10,000/-	Additional 6 Months’ Simple Imprisonment

¶16

(2 of 4)

¶17

[2023:RJ-JD:37031-DB]

¶18

[SOSA-898/2023]

¶19

2. Learned counsel for the applicant-appellants has submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the applicant-appellants vide impugned judgment. It is argued that the complainant viz. Ajaram (PW-1) and other eye witnesses viz. Smt. Shanti Devi (PW-2), Smt. Kamu Devi (PW-3) and Smt. Darmi (PW-4) have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. It is submitted that all the witnesses in one voice have deposed before the trial court that the injury on the body of the deceased was caused on account of falling on stone and was not caused on account of inflicting by the applicant-appellants. It is also submitted that the trial court has convicted and sentenced the applicant-appellants only on the basis of the recovery of the stick ( lathi ) claiming that the same were bloodstained. It is argued that the recovery of the stick ( lathi ) at the instance of the applicant-appellants is also doubtful as the same was recovered from the open place. It is further submitted that during trial, the applicant-appellants were on bail and they did not misuse any condition of the bail. It is also submitted that there is no likelihood to early hearing of the appeal filed by the applicant-appellants, therefore, the sentence awarded by the trial court to the applicant-appellants may kindly be suspended.

¶20

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer of the applicant-appellants for suspending his sentence.

¶21

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

¶22

5. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the fact that the accused

¶23

(3 of 4)

¶24

[2023:RJ-JD:37031-DB]

¶25

[SOSA-898/2023]

¶26

applicant-appellants were on bail during trial, we consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the accused appellants.

¶27

6. Accordingly, this suspension of sentence application filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court vide judgment dated dated 12.07.2023 in Sessions Case No.6/2019 (CIS No.6/2019) against applicant-appellants (1) Lakhmaram @ Laxman Kumar S/o Shri Ramaram and (2) Karsan @ Krishan Kumar S/o Dhanaramji shall remain suspended till final disposal of the appeal filed by them, provided each of them executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance in this court on 04.12.2023 and whenever ordered to do so, till the disposal of the appeal filed by them on the conditions indicated below:-

¶28

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

¶29

ii. That if the applicant-appellants changes 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

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

¶31

7. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant-appellants in a separate file. Such file be

¶32

(4 of 4)

¶33

[2023:RJ-JD:37031-DB]

¶34

[SOSA-898/2023]

¶35

registered as Criminal misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant-appellants 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-appellants do not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶36

(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J

¶37

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶38

Abhishek Kumar S.No.91

Lakhmaram @ Laxman Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhmaram @ Laxman 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

Jitendra Singh @ Janendra Singh @ Janna Vs State of Rajasthan

Heeralal Vs State of Rajasthan

Baljindra Kaur Vs State of Rajasthan