Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1567 (RAJ)

HEERA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2019-05-20

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2019
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 2. The instant second application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-applicant Heera, who has been convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No. 5/2013. 3. Mr. J.V.S. Deora, learned counsel representing the appellant-applicant, points out that this court was not apprised of the correct factual situation when the first application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the applicant Heera was rejected. Referring to the statement of the Investigating Officer Mr. Liladhar (P.W.15), Mr. Deora points out that the appellant was not subjected to test identification during investigation. He, thus, urges that first time identification of the accused by the witnesses during trial is of no evidentiary worth whatsoever. He further points out that the appeal has not been listed for hearing even once despite the fact that the accused is in custody since long. On these grounds, he craves indulgence of bail for the appellant during pendency of the appeal. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellant applicant. However, he too does not dispute the fact that the accused appellant was not subjected to test identification during investigation. 5. Manifestly, thus, the observation made by this court while rejecting the first application for suspension of sentence to the extent of the appellant-applicant Heera is factually incorrect. In this background, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant-applicant Heera by accepting the instant application. 6. Accordingly, the instant second application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajsamand vide judgment dated 18.10.2016 passed in Sessions Case No. 5/2013 against the appellant-applicant Heera S/o Moti shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties 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 20.06.2019 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 applicant 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 addresss, 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-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant 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 applicant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.