Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kor Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 4 August, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 420/2022
1. Kor Singh S/o Gurdayal Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Meera Colony, Nearby Ware House, Ward No. 28,
Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh. (Confined In
Central Jail, Bikaner)
2. Sandeep @ Gurpreet Singh S/o Kor Singh, Aged About 21
Years, R/o Meera Colony, Nearby Ware House, Ward No.
28, Hanumangarh Town, District Hanumangarh. (Confined
In Central Jail, Bikaner)
3. Smt. Pooja W/o Kalu Ram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Bay,
Taranagar Police Station, District Churu. (Confined In
Central Jail, Bikaner)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Shaktawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, AGC
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI Order 04/08/2022 The instant application for suspension of sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by appellants-applicants who have been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 20.03.2021 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Nohar, Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.17/2018: (Downloaded on 04/08/2022 at 09:03:57 PM)
(2 of 5) [SOSA-420/2022] Offence Under Imprisonment Fine Sentence in Section default of fine 302/34 IPC Life imprisonment Rs.10,000/- 2 Months' SI 201 IPC 3 Years' RI Rs.1,000/- 15 Days' SI
Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Learned Public Prosecutor has filed reply to the application for suspension of sentences.
Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant application for suspension of sentences are noted hereinbelow:-
The appellant Pooja was married to the deceased Kaluram about six years before the incident. Kaluram and Pooja went missing whereupon, his brother Deepak lodged a missing person report (No.01/2018) at the Police Station Tibbi on 12.02.2018. Enquiry of the missing person report was assigned to Shri Lekhram, ASI Police Station Tibbi who claims to have interrogated the appellants who allegedly confessed that Pooja was involved in an illicit affair with the accused appellants Sandeep @ Gurpreet Singh and Kor Singh and that as a culmination of this illicit affair, Shri Kaluram was murdered in the field of Sukhdev Singh and his dead body was buried therein. Shri Lekhram submitted the inquiry report with the above conclusions whereupon, FIR No. 104/2018 came to be registered at the Police Station Rawatsar on 17.02.2018. The accused appellants were arrested on 18.02.2018 and the IO claims to have recorded informations of all three accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and purportedly acting in furtherance thereof, the skeletal remains of Shri Kaluram were recovered buried in the field of Sukhdev Singh.
(Downloaded on 04/08/2022 at 09:03:57 PM)
(3 of 5) [SOSA-420/2022] We have gone through the impugned judgment and the record and find that entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence in form of extra-judicial confession, recovery of the dead body and motive.
On a perusal of the statements of the witnesses who deposed about extra-judicial confession viz. Deepak (PW.1), Dhanna Ram (PW.2), Savitri (PW.3), Vidhya Devi (PW.4) and Manju (PW.5), it is clear that though these witnesses alleged that the accused Pooja made an extra-judicial confession but they also stated that the accused was present at the police station when she confessed to the crime.
The enquiry of the missing person report was undertaken by Lekhram (PW.16) who stated in his evidence that during thereof, he concluded that accused persons had killed Kaluram owing to illicit marital affairs of Pooja with Sandeep @ Gurpreet Singh and Kor Singh and that the dead body was buried in the field of Sukhdev Singh.
Apparently thus, the location where the dead body was recovered was already know to the police. There is merit in the contention of the appellants' counsel that the extra-judicial confession having been extracted at the police station, would be hit by Section 24 of the Evidence Act.
Furthermore, we find that interrogation notes of the accused (Ex.P/37 - Pooja, Ex.P/38 - Kor Singh and Ex.P/39 - Sandeep @ Gurpreet Singh) which contain detailed confessions made by the accused and were recorded by a police officer at the police station, were allowed to be proved by the trial court in gross violation of Section 25 of the Evidence Act. In this background, we are of the opinion that the appellants have available to them, strong and (Downloaded on 04/08/2022 at 09:03:57 PM) (4 of 5) [SOSA-420/2022] plausible grounds for assailing the impugned judgment. Hearing of the appeal is likely to consume time.
Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Nohar, District Hanumangarh vide judgment dated 20.03.2021 in Sessions Case No.17/2018 against the appellants-
applicants (1) Kor Singh S/o Shri Gurdayal Singh, (2) Sandeep @ Gurpreet Singh S/o Shri Kor Singh and (3) Smt. Pooja W/o Kalu Ram shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on bail subject to the condition that each of them shall furnish 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 06.09.2022 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), 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-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the (Downloaded on 04/08/2022 at 09:03:57 PM) (5 of 5) [SOSA-420/2022] accused-applicant(s) was/were 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(s) does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.
(FARJAND ALI),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
31-Sudhir Asopa/-
(Downloaded on 04/08/2022 at 09:03:57 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)