Suresh Chandra S/O Shri Nathuram Vs State of Rajasthan

The present criminal misc. application has been filed by the applicant/appellant with the prayer to extend/grant further time to him to furnish the bail bonds as directed by the Court vide its order dated 18.05.2015 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.56/1993.

¶15

Counsel for the applicant/appellant submits that because of communication gap between the applicant/appellant and his lawyer, he was not made aware of the order dated 18.05.2015 passed by the Court by which the sentence of imprisonment awarded to him was modified and he was directed to submit the bail bonds within a period of three months. Counsel further submits that because of non submitting the bail bonds as ordered by the Court, the applicant/appellant has now been taken in

¶16

[2025:RJ-JP:3342]

¶17

[CRLMA-7/2025]

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

custody on 03.01.2025. Counsel further submits that the applicant/appellant is an old aged person of about seventy two (72) years and it would be in the interest of justice to extend the time to furnish the bail bonds as directed earlier by the Court.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the applicant/appellant and submits that the applicant/appellant is approaching the Court after more than nine and a half year and he does not deserve any leniency. 4. Considered the submissions made at bar and perused the application.

¶21

5 The accused-applicant/appellant was convicted vide judgment dated 29.01.1993 passed by the Court of Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Jaipur in Criminal Case No.11/1990 for offence under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and was sentenced to undergo six months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months additional simple imprisonment.

¶22

Against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29.01.1993, the accused-applicant/appellant also preferred the S.B. Criminal Appeal No.56/1993. The aforesaid appeal was disposed of vide judgment dated 18.05.2015 with the operative paras as under:-

¶23

"Accordingly, the appeal of appellants is partly allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence of fine awarded to the accused appellants is maintained. However, the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the accused appellants is modified and it is directed that :

¶24

(i) if they execute a personal bond of Rs.30,000/-(rupees thirty thousands) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:3342]

[CRLMA-7/2025]

stipulation to appear and receive sentence as and when called upon to do so within a period of one year and in the meanwhile maintains peace and good behaviour, the accused should be released under Sec.360 Cr.P.C.

¶29

(ii) The bonds should be furnished within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the trial court shall take steps for execution of the sentence awarded to the appellants;

¶30

(iv)impugned judgment stands modified, s indicated hereinabove."

¶31

Having regard the submissions made by counsel for the applicant/appellant, so also the reasons mentioned in the present misc. application and more particularly the fact that the applicant/appellant is in custody since 03.01.2025 and he is an old aged person of seventy two (72) years, this Court, in the interest of justice, deems just and proper to extend the time for executing the personal bonds and sureties as directed by the Court vide order dated 18.05.2015.

¶32

Accordingly, the present criminal misc. application is allowed and the applicant/appellant is allowed four weeks' time from today to execute the personal bonds and sureties as directed earlier by the Court vide order dated 18.05.2015.

¶33

However, it is observed that in case, the applicant/appellant fails to comply with the above directions within this extended period, this order shall automatically stand recalled.

¶34

Since the applicant/appellant is in custody, he is ordered to be released from custody immediately.

¶35

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶36

ARTI SHARMA /126

Suresh Chandra S/O Shri Nathuram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Chandra S/O Shri Nathuram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Kumar S/O Shri Mahaveer Singh Badwa Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahaveer Vs State

Shiv Ratan Vs State

Mahesh Kumar Sharma Son of Late Shri Poornanand Sharma Vs Jitendra Kumar Sharma Son of Shri Gajanand Sharma

Muhar Khan Son of Nijar Khan Mev, Vs State of Rajasthan

Inder Singh Chundawat S/O Late Shri Gopal Singh Chundawat Vs State of Rajasthan