Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1718 (RAJ)

Budhram v. State of Rajasthan

2021-09-14

GOVERDHAN BARDHAR, VIJAY BISHNOI

body2021
JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentences. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicant vide impugned judgment. It is argued that there is no direct evidence against the appellant-applicant and the trial court has relied upon the so called circumstantial evidence produced by the prosecution, but the wholesome reading of the said evidence will not be sufficient to conclude that the appellant-applicant has committed murder of deceased - Pappu. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant while inviting attention of this Court towards the statements of the complainant and other witnesses, who are near relatives of the deceased, has argued that none of the witnesses has levelled direct allegation against the appellant-applicant. It is further submitted that the trial court has placed much reliance upon the evidence of Babu Lal (PW-1) while treating him as last seen witness, however, as per the evidence of Babu Lal (PW-1), he saw the appellant-applicant and the deceased together on 31.7.2015, whereas the dead body of Pappu was recovered on 3.8.2015. It is also submitted that one leg of deceased Pappu was amputed, but the said amputed part has not been recovered by the police. Learned counsel has submitted that so far as recovery of the weapon is concerned, one stick and farsa were recovered at the instance of the appellant-applicant, but these weapons were not sufficient to ampute the deceased's leg. It is also submitted that the appellant- applicant has undergone sentence of more than six years till date and there is no likelihood that the appeal preferred on his behalf will be heard in near future, therefore, sentences awarded to him by the trial court may be suspended. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the application for suspension of sentences. Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the circumstantial evidence such as last seen, recovery of weapon and the motive are proved by the prosecution and the trial court has not committed any illegality in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicant vide impugned judgment. Learned counsel for the complainant, thus, prayed that it is not a fit case where sentences awarded to the appellant-applicant by the trial court may be suspended. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant, thus, prayed that it is not a fit case where sentences awarded to the appellant-applicant by the trial court may be suspended. 4. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case; after scrutinizing the record of the trial court; keeping in view the statements of the prosecution witnesses, particularly brothers of the deceased and the evidence of Babu Lal (PW-1), who has simply said that he saw the appellant-applicant with the deceased on 31.7.2015, but the dead body was recovered on 3.8.2015 and taking into consideration the custody period of the appellant-applicant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to suspend the sentences awarded to him by the trial court. 5. Accordingly, this second application for suspension of sentences is allowed and it is directed that the sentences awarded to appellant-applicant - Budhram S/o Bhikha Ram by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bansoor (Alwar) vide judgment dated 11.1.2018 in Sessions Case No.13/2015 shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal provided he executes a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two solvent sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance before this Court on 29.10.2021 and whenever called upon to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions inidcated 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(s) to the trial court. 6. 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. 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.