Allowed

Raichand v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Jul 2024SOSA/141/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a second suspension of sentence application under Section 389 Cr.P.C., releasing the convicted appellant on bail pending the hearing of his appeal, noting the delay in hearing and lack of intent to kill procured an order to suspend and allow him on bail with bonds and conditions, contingent on his release while the appeal proceeds.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended; accused released on bail conditioned to execute a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Raichand Vs State of Rajasthan — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:28802]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc 2^nd Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 141/2024

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal No.538/2023

¶6

Raichand S/o Shri Krishan Kumar, Aged About 27 Years, (At Present Lodged In Dist. Jail, Hanumangarh).

¶7

----Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G.R. Bhari For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Purohit, AGA

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶13

Order

¶14

10/07/2024

¶15

The instant second application for suspension of sentence has been moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated 21.04.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No1, Nohar District Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.20/2021 whereby he was convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of seven years under Section 304-II r.w. Section 34 of the IPC with a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default in payment of fine to further undergo one month’s R.I.

¶16

His first bail application being SBCRLMSOSA No.430/2023 was dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide its order dated 10.07.2023 but a liberty was granted to the petitioner to approach this Court again if appeal is not heard within a reasonable period

[2024:RJ-JD:28802]

[SOSA-141/2024]

(2 of 4)

of time. After passing of the said order, a year has been lapsed but hearing of the appeal is not done, hence, the instant application for suspension of sentence.

¶21

It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the learned trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court; hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be granted.

¶22

Per contra , learned public prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicant for releasing the appellant on application for suspension of sentence.

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶24

After dismissal of the first application for suspension of sentence, further one year has elapsed and there is no likelihood of hearing of the appeal in near future. The case of the prosecution mainly rests upon the sole testimony of P.W. 4 Har Lal, as per which, the accused Raichand allegedly threw a brick on Sheokaran and as a result of the said injury he succumbed to death. There is substance in the submission of learned counsel that the applicant neither had an intent to kill the deceased nor he was having any knowledge that throwing the brick could be proved fatal. This reduces the gravity of the alleged offence.

(3 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JD:28802]

[SOSA-141/2024]

Further appreciation of evidence will be done by this Court while deciding the appeal, which will surely take a long time.

¶29

During the pendency of the appeal and while hearing an application for suspension of sentence, this Court is not supposed to opine that the evidence of the prosecution is doubtful or evidence of the defence is more worthy of acceptance since doing so may fix the fate of the appeal. Thus, desisting from doing so, but taking into account the totality of the overall facts and circumstances of the case and particularly the issues mentioned above and the fact that the petitioner is behind the bars since 17.12.2020, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant.

¶30

Accordingly, the second application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the impugned order of sentence dated 21.04.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Nohar District Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.20/2021 against the appellantapplicant Raichand S/o Shri Krishan Kumar shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 20.08.2024 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶31

(1) That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

(4 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JD:28802]

[SOSA-141/2024]

(2) That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶36

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

¶37

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accusedapplicant was 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 does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶38

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶39

121-Mamta/-

Raichand v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raichand 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

Dharmendra Choubisa Vs Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigm Limited

Omveer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Chimna Ram Suthar Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Shanti Devi Vs the State of Rajasthan

Surendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Surajbhan Vs State of Rajasthan