Allowed

Chhaju S/O Ramswaroop v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Apr 2025SOSA/239/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge High Court allowed suspension of sentence application by four appellants convicted in a criminal trial for assault and attempted murder. The order suspends their sentences pending the disposal of their appeal, subject to specific bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Sentence of all four appellants is suspended till disposal of appeal on condition of executing a personal bond with two sureties and adhering to specified conditions regarding criminal activity and co

Chhaju S/O Ramswaroop Vs State of Rajasthan — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:16485]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 239/2025

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 292/2025

¶6

Chhaju S/o Ramswaroop, Resident Of Khatipura Police Station Suroth District Karauli (Presently In Dist. Jail Karauli)

¶7

Ramotar S/o Late Kalyan, Resident Of Khatipura Police Station Suroth District Karauli (Presently In Dist. Jail Karauli)

¶8

Sunil S/o Late Kalyan, Resident Of Khatipura Police Station Suroth District Karauli (Presently In Dist. Jail Karauli)

¶9

Vishnu S/o Mahesh, Resident Of Khatipura Police Station Suroth District Karauli (Presently In Dist. Jail Karauli)

¶10

----Petitioners

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p

¶13

----Respondent

¶14

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. S.K. Gupta, Senior Advocate with
		Mr. Arvind Sharma, Ms. Surbhi Agarwal, Ms. Pankaj Solanki & Ms. Chanchal
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, AGA
		Mr. Vikram Beniwal

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶16

Order

¶17

17/04/2025

¶18

Instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by accused Chhaju, Ramotar, Sunil and Vishnu in pending appeal filed aggrieved from judgment of conviction and sentence dated 23.01.2025 in sessions case no. 209/2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge no.2, Hindaun City, District Karauli whereby petitioner accused were convicted under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 504 and 307/34 of IPC. The maximum sentence

[2025:RJ-JP:16485]

[SOSA-239/2025]

(2 of 4)

awarded to each of the petitioner is seven years under Section 307/34 of IPC.

¶23

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioners while placing reliance upon grounds of appeal submits that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated by prosecution. He further submitted that this is a case of free fight with group of complainant party who were aggressors. He also submitted that injured Govind and Gajanand have sustained injuries but none of them is dangerous to life. He further submitted that as per injured, the injury was caused by sharped edged weapon but police has not recovered any sharp edged article from any of petitioner. He further referred report of medical jurist and submitted that the injury was found to be caused by blunt object and same is not corroborated from the statement of injured. He further referred the discrepancies and contradictions in the cross-examination of witnesses about the incident and submitted that no specific attribution about the injury is reflected from the evidence. At last, he submitted that all the petitioners were on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time, therefore, they are entitled for bail.

¶24

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for complainant. Learned counsel for complainant submits that one of the injured has sustained a grievous injury on skull and same is dangerous to life. He also referred the statement of injured Gajanand and Govind and submitted that all the four persons were named by them and the petitioners are not entitled for bail. Learned Public Prosecutor has also submitted custody certificates and same are taken on record.

[2025:RJ-JP:16485]

[SOSA-239/2025]

(3 of 4)

Heard learned Senior Advocate for appellant, learned counsel for complainant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On the basis of statement of injured Govind (Ex. P/1) recorded on 01.06.2014 on the assault FIR no. 151/2014 under Sections 143, 323, 341 and 504 IPC was registered at P.S. Suroth District Karauli. After investigation police has filed charge-sheet against four petitioners under Sections 323, 341, 324, 325, 307, 504 and 34 IPC. After framing of charge, the prosecution has examined 16 witnesses and exhibited 21 documents. Accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they have not submitted any defence evidence but exhibited 10 documents. A perusal of record indicate that a cross case was also registered as FIR no. 160/2014 wherein also a charge-sheet has been filed. The site plan was also exhibited in defence. The record indicate that 5 persons PW-1 Govind, PW-4 Kaushal, PW-5 Gajanand, PW-6 Bina, PW-7 Ajay have sustained injuries. The injury reports Ex. P/2 (Govind), Ex. P/4 (Kaushal), Ex. P/5 (Gajanand), Ex. P/6 (Bina) and Ex. P/7 (Ajay) were exhibited and proved by PW-9 Dr. Deep Chand. X-ray plate of Govind and Gajanand were also exhibited as Ex. P/8 to P/11. A recovery of lathi (stick) was made from accused Ramotar. Learned trial court has considered statement of injured, PW-9 Dr. Deep Chand and concluded that accused Chhaju and Ramotar have assaulted injured Gajanand on his head. We have gone through the medical opinion about the injuries. All the petitioners were on bail during trial. 6. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellants can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is

[2025:RJ-JP:16485]

[SOSA-239/2025]

(4 of 4)

allowed and sentence of appellants accused- Chhaju S/o Ramswaroop, Ramotar S/o Late Kalyan, Sunil S/o Late Kalyan and Vishnu S/o Mahesh is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that each of them would execute 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 their appearance in this court on 29.07.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶33

After release of appellant on bail, they will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found that they is involved in any criminal activity, the order shall be recalled.

¶34

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

¶35

That if the applicant(s) 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.

¶36

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

¶37

Misc. Application stands disposed of.

¶38

A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail.

¶39

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶40

CHETNA BEHRANI /39(SOSA)

Chhaju S/O Ramswaroop v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhaju S/O Ramswaroop 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

Irfan S/O Roshan Ali Pathan Vs State of Rajasthan

Manprit Singh S/O Shri Ajayab Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Gollu Alias Ravindra S/O Nemi Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Rahul S/O Shankar Paswan Vs State of Rajasthan

Ansar Qureshi Son of Late Shri Shahbuddin Qureshi Vs Ritesh Patni Son of Shri S.C. Jain

Sunil Singh S/O Sh. Ganpat Singh Vs State of Rajasthan