Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 550 (RAJ)

Keshar Singh v. State, Through PP

2019-02-15

SANDEEP MEHTA, VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. Learned Public Prosecutor has chosen not to file reply to this application for suspension of sentences and proposes to argue the matter orally. 2. Heard learned counsel representing the applicant appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the impugned judgment and the material available on record. 3. The appellant applicant herein stands convicted for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC vide judgment dated 03.11.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Udaipur in Sessions Case No. 133/2016. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently and fervently contended that there is no evidence worth the name of the record of the case so as to connect the appellant with the alleged crime. The offence took place in the second week of May, 2012 whereas, the appellant was arrested after nearly eight months i.e. on 25.02.2013. The ornaments allegedly recovered at the instance of the accused were never subjected to proper identification so that the same could be linked with the deceased. He further submitted that two motbir witnesses who associated in the recovery of the ornaments, were not examined during the course of the trial and thus, there is no linking evidence on the basis whereof, the appellant can be held guilty for the murder of Panni Devi. He thus urges that the applicant appellant, who is in custody since the last nearly six years, deserves indulgence of bail during the pendency of the appeal. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by Shri Menaria. However, he too is not in a position to dispute the fact that the appellant was arrested after nearly eight months of the incident and that the recovered ornaments were not subjected to proper identification at the hands of the relevant witnesses. 6. In this background and considering the prolonged period of incarceration suffered by the applicant appellant and the bleak chances of an early hearing of the appeal, we are inclined to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant, during pendency of the appeal. 7. 6. In this background and considering the prolonged period of incarceration suffered by the applicant appellant and the bleak chances of an early hearing of the appeal, we are inclined to suspend the sentences awarded to the appellant, during pendency of the appeal. 7. 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 the Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Udaipur, vide judgment dated 03.11.2018 in Sessions Case No. 133/2016 against the appellant-applicant Keshar Singh, 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. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 15.03.2019 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. 8. 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 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.