Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 199 (RAJ)

Ashok Alias Ashvin v. State of Rajasthan

2021-01-22

DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA, SANDEEP MEHTA

body2021
ORDER 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 parties. Perused the impugned judgment and the record. 3. The instant application for suspension of sentences has been preferred on behalf of the appellant applicant who has been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 20.10.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banswara in Sessions Case No.51/2016 (CIS No.47/2016): Offences Sentences Fine Fine Default sentences Section 302 Life Imprisonment Rs.10,000/- 6 Months' S.I. 4. Learned counsel Shri Shambhoo Singh representing the appellant, vehemently and fervently contended that there is no evidence worth the name of the record of the case to connect the appellant with the alleged crime. He further urged that as a matter of fact, the appellant Ashok and the victim Vandana were involved in a love affair but the family members of Vandana were opposed to their relationship. He urged that Vandana had come to the house of the appellant on her own on teh fateful day. Her family members came there in a clandestine manner. They killed Vandana and also tried to murder the appellant by way of honour-killing. He drew the Court's attention to the statements of Kareng (PW-4) and Shankar (PW-9) and urged that on a bare perusal of evidence of these two witnesses, it becomes apparent that the appellant himself was lying unconscious in the attic of his house and thus, clearly the prosecution allegation that the appellant murdered Vandana is falsified. He further urged that the appellant had no motive whatsoever to kill Vandana and thus, his conviction recorded by the learned trial court is absolutely unjustified and he deserves indulgence of bail, during pendency of the appeal. 5. On the other hand, Shri Farzand AN, learned AAG-cum-GA assisted by Shri B.R. Bishnoi, learned AGC, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's counsel. He pointed out that the appelant Ashok is the cousin brother of Vandana. He seduced the victim and both were carrying on with each other since long. However, just before the incident, Ashok got engaged to another girl and had ditched Vandana who started pressurising Ashok to marry her. He pointed out that the appelant Ashok is the cousin brother of Vandana. He seduced the victim and both were carrying on with each other since long. However, just before the incident, Ashok got engaged to another girl and had ditched Vandana who started pressurising Ashok to marry her. In order to get rid of Vandana from his path, Ashok called her to his house on the fateful day and then killed her by using a sharp weapon. He thus urged that the appellant does not deserve indulgence of bail during pendency of the appeal. 6. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the material available on record. 7. Ex-facie, it is clear on going through the photographs and the postmortem report of the deceased Vandana that she was killed by slitting her throat by a sharp weapon and knife marks are also existed on her wrist. There is wholesome evidence on record to show that the appellant had called Vandana to his house on the fateful day as is clear from the deposition of Jagdish (PW-16). Soon thereafter, Jagdish was informed that something had happened to his daughter on which, he, his wife and other family members rushed to the house of Ashok where, they saw Vandana lying dead with her throat cut and the wrist of her right hand was also sliced. Ashok was present in the attic of the house who was brought down by the police officers and arrested at the spot. The theory put forth by Shri Shambhoo Singh, learned counsel representing the appellant, that it is a case of honour-killing is prima-facie not palpable at this stage. 8. Considering the nature and gravity of allegations attributed to the appellant and significant evidence available on record, without commenting on the merits of the case, we are not inclined to accept this application for suspension of sentences which is dismissed as being devoid of merit.