Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1019 (RAJ)

Vikki Arora v. State of Rajasthan

2014-04-25

BANWARI LAL SHARMA, DINESH MAHESHWARI

body2014
JUDGMENT 1. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that so far the applicant Vikki Arora (appellant No. 2 in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 648/2013) is concerned, the case against him is clearly distinguishable from that against the other accused persons inasmuch as it was alleged against the applicant that he was carrying gandasi with him and took part in the incident with use of such a weapon but then, neither any injury from sharp-edged weapon is pointed out on the person of the deceased nor the alleged gandasi has been recovered in the matter. 2. It is submitted that the alleged recovery of two empty cartridges at the instance of the applicant is seriously questionable and in any case, is not relatable to the allegations otherwise made by the alleged eye-witnesses. It is also submitted that the applicant was on bail during the trial and no useful purpose would be served with his further detention in the matter, particularly when the disposal of the appeal is likely to take longer time. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor has duly opposed the bail application and has particularly submitted that the recovery of the empty cartridges at the instance of the applicant cannot be said to be a circumstance entirely irrelevant. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the complainant has additionally pointed out that another matter concerning FIR No. 22/09 Police Station Srikaranpur for offences, inter alia, under Section 307 IPC is pending trial wherein essentially allegations against the same accused persons are of having assaulted and caused injuries to the father of Mitu, the deceased in the present case. It is submitted that the present incident occurred after a few days of the incident related to the said FIR and a comprehension of the fact and surrounding factors makes it clear that the intention of the accused persons had been to kill the persons of the same family and they ultimately succeeded in killing Mitu, the deceased in the present case 5. When the said case related to FIR No. 22/09 PS Srikaranpur is pending trial, we would, obviously, not be making any comments in relation thereof, but so far as the present case is concerned, of course, without any expression on the merits, we deem it just and proper to suspend the execution of sentence as awarded to the applicant. 6. When the said case related to FIR No. 22/09 PS Srikaranpur is pending trial, we would, obviously, not be making any comments in relation thereof, but so far as the present case is concerned, of course, without any expression on the merits, we deem it just and proper to suspend the execution of sentence as awarded to the applicant. 6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of execution of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that execution of the sentence awarded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Srikaranpur (Sriganganagar) in the judgment and order dated 26.07.2013 against the applicant-appellant Vikki Arora S/o Roshan Lal Arora shall remain suspended until final disposal of the appeal provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) along with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court for his appearance in this Court on 29.05.2014 and subsequently before the Trial Court on the following conditions:- 1. That he will appear before the Trial Court in the months of January and July every year until the appeal is decided. 2. That if the appellant change the place of residence, he will give the changed address in writing to the Trial Court, High Court as well as to his counsel in the High Court. 3. Similarly if sureties change their address, they will give in writing their changed address to the Trial Court. 7. 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 the Sessions 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 this Court for cancellation of bail. 8. 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 this Court for cancellation of bail. 8. At the cost of repetition, it is made clear that suspension of execution of sentence in the present case shall otherwise have no bearing on merit consideration of this appeal filed by the appellant as also the merit consideration of the Sessions Case relating to FIR No.22/09, said to be pending trial. *******