This court allowed an application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence awarded to three appellants during the pendency of their appeal, directing them to furnish a bond and appear in court.
Suspended the execution of the sentence during the pendency of the appeal upon furnishing a personal bond and sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JP:557]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1244/2023
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.2334/2023
----Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
| For Appellant(s) | : Mr. |
Abdul Kalam Khan |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. | Ritesh Kumawat | |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. |
Prashant Sharma,P.P. |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Order
04/01/2024
Instant application for suspension of sentence has been preferred on behalf of the applicant-appellants under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. alongwith the appeal, to suspend the sentence awarded by the Court of Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota (Rajasthan), vide its judgment dated 08.08.2023, in Sessions Case No.102/2020, whereby the applicant-appellants
[2024:RJ-JP:557]
[SOSA-1244/2023]
(2 of 3)
were convicted for the alleged offence(s) & sentenced to undergo maximum period of seven years simple imprisonment with fine.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant-appellants submits that during trial, applicant No.1 was not on bail and appellant No.2 & 3 were on bail, the applicant No.1 is already behind the bars from last more than three years & four months & the applicant Nos.2 & 3 are also behind the bars since the date of judgment i.e. 08.08.2023 and the hearing of the appeal will take its own time, hence, the sentence awarded to the applicantappellants may be suspended during the pendency of the appeal.
Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the submissions made herein-above.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
Taking into consideration the term of sentence & the submissions made at bar and without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the applicant-appellants during the pendency of the appeal.
Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is, hereby, ordered that the execution of sentence awarded to accused-applicants, namely, (i) Dharmraj @ Chhote Rawal S/o Sampatraj, (ii) Banbari Nagar @ Golu S/o Shri Rakesh Nagar and (iii) Sarfaraj Saifi S/o Shri Abdul Saleem, by the learned Trial Court shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.25,000/each, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the
(3 of 3) [SOSA-1244/2023]
[2024:RJ-JP:557]
stipulation that they shall appear before this Court on 05.02.2024 and thereafter, as and when they are called upon to do so.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J
SAURABH /104
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the sentence awarded to the appellants should be suspended during the pendency of the appeal under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dharmraj @ Chhote Rawal
Banbari Nagar @ Golu
Sarfaraj Saifi
State Of Rajasthan
Vinod Kumar Bharwani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
