Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Narayan @ Parbhu Bhil vs State Of Rajasthan on 14 December, 2022
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi, Manoj Kumar Garg
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 785/2022
1. Narayan @ Parbhu Bhil S/o Shri Varda Bhil, Aged About
28 Years, R/o Umriya Ki Bhagal, P.s. Rajnagar, Dist.
Rajsamand. (At Present Lodged At District Jail,
Rajsamand)
2. Shanker Bhil S/o Shri Varda Bhil, Aged About 30 Years,
R/o Umriya Ki Bhagal, P.s. Rajnagar, Dist. Rajsamand. (At
Present Lodged At District Jail, Rajsamand)
3. Roshan Bhil S/o Shri Varda Bhil, Aged About 23 Years,
R/o Umriya Ki Bhagal, P.s. Rajnagar, Dist. Rajsamand. (At
Present Lodged At District Jail, Rajsamand)
4. Raku @ Rukmani W/o Shri Varda Bhil, Aged About 53
Years, R/o Umriya Ki Bhagal, P.s. Rajnagar, Dist.
Rajsamand. (At Present Lodged At District Jail,
Rajsamand)
5. Leela Bhil D/o Shri Varda Bhil, Aged About 25 Years, R/o
Umriya Ki Bhagal, P.s. Rajnagar, Dist. Rajsamand. (At
Present Lodged At District Jail, Rajsamand)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. SS Sisodia
Mr. Tarun Dhaka
For Respondent(s) : Mr. RR Chhaparwal, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG Order 14/12/2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentence.
(Downloaded on 14/12/2022 at 11:56:50 PM)
(2 of 4) [SOSA-785/2022] The instant application for suspension of sentence has been preferred by the appellants-applicants, who have been convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No.15/2018 vide judgment dated 16.08.2022. The appellants-applicants have been sentenced as under :-
Offence U/s Sentence Fine Fine Default in sentence 148 IPC 2 years' RI Rs.2,000/- 10 days' S.I. 341 IPC 1 Month' S.I. Rs.500/- 7 days' S.I. 323/149 IPC 1 year' S.I. Rs.500/- 7 days' S.I. 302/149 IPC Life Rs.10,000/- 6 month S.I. Imprisonment Learned counsel for the appellant-applicants has submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicants vide order dated 16.08.2022. It is submitted that in the FIR as well as in the court statements of the complainant and the alleged eye witnesses viz. Kamla (PW-6), Pushpa (PW-11) and Kanwara (PW-12), omnibus allegations have been levelled against the appellant-applicants. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicants while inviting our attention towards the post-mortem report (Ex.P-23) as well as the statements of the concerned doctor, who has conducted the post-mortem has submitted that there was one fatal injury on the body of the deceased. It is also submitted that from the statements of the alleged eye witnesses as well as the injured persons (PW-11 and PW-12), it is clear that they have not told the truth before the trial court.
It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, the deceased (Downloaded on 14/12/2022 at 11:56:50 PM) (3 of 4) [SOSA-785/2022] was in drunken condition and he tried to tress-pass the house of the accused party by climbing the wall but slipped from it and received injury. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicants has also submitted that appellants Raku and Leelu were on bail during trial. It is also submitted that the other appellant-applicants are in custody since 16.06.2017 and the appeal filed by them is not likely to be heard in near future. It is, thus, prayed that the sentence awarded to the appellant-applicants by the trial court may be suspended.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties; after carefully scrutinizing the record of the case, particularly the post-mortem report and the statements of the doctor, who conducted the post- mortem and taking into consideration the custody period of the appellant-applicants, this Court is inclined to suspend the sentence awarded to the appellant-applicants by the trial court vide judgment impugned.
Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No.15/2018 against appellant- applicants namely Narayan @ Parbhu Bhil S/o Shri Varda Bhil, Shanker Bhil S/o Shri Varda Bhil, Roshan Bhil S/o Shri Varda Bhil, Raku @ Rukmani W/o Shri Varda Bhil and Leela Bhil D/o Shri Varda Bhil shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal provided each of them executes a personal bond (Downloaded on 14/12/2022 at 11:56:50 PM) (4 of 4) [SOSA-785/2022] 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 23.01.2023 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.
2. That if the appellant 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.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.
The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused- appellant 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J
22-mohit/-
(Downloaded on 14/12/2022 at 11:56:50 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)