Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 913 (RAJ)

Dala Ram v. State, Through PP

2019-03-26

SANDEEP MEHTA, VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 CrPC has been preferred by appellant-applicant Dala Ram, who has been convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 14.09.2018 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jalore in Sessions Case No. 31/2016. 2. Learned counsel Mr. Dhirendra Singh representing the appellant-applicant vehemently and fervently submits that there is no evidence worth the name of the record of the case so as to connect the appellant with the crime. He urged that the case of the prosecution is based totally on circumstantial evidence and a conjectural theory has been put up that the accused killed Banshi Lal owing to a land dispute and strung him up a tree so as to give the incident, shape of a suicide. He urged that ex facie, the evidence of motive is falsified in view of the fact that none of the prosecution witnesses supported this theory. He also referred to the statement of Dr. Puranmal Mohnot (P.W.16), who categorically stated that the deceased Shri Banshi Lal expired due to antemortem hanging and that the sharp weapon injury noticed on his head was not even remotely connected with the death. He further urged that the recoveries effected by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation are totally concocted and fabricated. He further urged that a slip was received from the pocket of the deceased, which indicates that he was apprehensive that he might be done to death by persons, named, Dala Ram, Hadman Ram and Kona Ram etc. He urged that if at all it was a case of murder, manifestly, the accused would not have given a chance to the deceased to scribble this note and rather it is a clear case, wherein the deceased ended his own life by tying a noose and hanging from a tree. He urged that the appellant is in custody from last more than three years and hearing of the appeal is likely to consume time. On these grounds, he implored the court to accept this application for suspension of sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant during the pendency of the appeal. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and Mr. A.R. Nikub, learned counsel representing the complainant, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellants counsel. On these grounds, he implored the court to accept this application for suspension of sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant during the pendency of the appeal. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and Mr. A.R. Nikub, learned counsel representing the complainant, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellants counsel. They urged that Banshi Lal had sold his land to Jog Singh, whereas the accused appellants were desirous of taking the said land. Owing to this enmity, the accused first inflicted a sharp weapon blow on the head of the deceased, knocked him unconscious and then tied a noose to his neck and strung him from a tree so as to give the incident shape of a suicide. They, thus, urged that the applicant do not deserve indulgence of bail during the pendency of the appeal. 4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at bar and have gone through the material available on record. It is amply clear that the case of the prosecution is based totally on circumstantial evidence. The motive which has been portrayed in the prosecution case for the murder is that Banshi Lal had sold the land to Jog Singh and the accused were annoyed by this transaction. Jog Singh, when examined as P.W.5 did not support this theory and was declared hostile. The dead body of Shri Banshi Lal was recovered while hanging from a tree. Some blood was oozing out from an injury which looked to be a sharp wound. The medical officer Dr. Puran Mal Mohnot (P.W.16), upon being examined at the trial gave affirmative evidence that the sharpish injury noticed on the occipital region of the deceased was superficial in nature and that blood had coaguled on the wound. Hence, the injury was caused well before the death of Shri Banshi Lal. He gave a positive finding that the cause of death of Shri Banshi Lal was antemortem hanging. The photographs taken by the Investigating Officer indicate that the deceased is hanging with a noose of rope tied around his neck and is hanging from a tree. Thus, manifestly, the case of the prosecution that the deceased was initially knocked to unconscious and then he was strung up from the tree is belied from these circumstances. The photographs taken by the Investigating Officer indicate that the deceased is hanging with a noose of rope tied around his neck and is hanging from a tree. Thus, manifestly, the case of the prosecution that the deceased was initially knocked to unconscious and then he was strung up from the tree is belied from these circumstances. Any conclusions by this court on this aspect may prejudice the final disposal of the appeal, but in any event, having regard to the over all facts and circumstances as available on record and the significant custodial period suffered by accused appellant and the faint chances of early hearing of the appeal, we are inclined to accept the instant application for suspension of sentence. 5. Accordingly, the 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 Sessions Judge, Jalore vide judgment dated 14.09.2018 in Sessions Case No. 31/2016 against the appellant-applicant Dala Ram S/o Savaji, 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 26.04.2019 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 address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 6. 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/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. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused applicant 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 does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.