Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1437 (RAJ)

Naresh v. State Of Rajasthan

2022-05-06

SANDEEP MEHTA, VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. The instant application for suspension of sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by appellant-applicant Naresh S/o Shri Bhanji who has been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 29.11.2018 passed by learned addl. Sessions Judge, Sagwada, District Dungarpur in Sessions Case No.09/2017: Offence Under Section Imprisonment Fine Sentence in default of fine 302 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.5,000/- 1 Year's SI 2. Learned Public Prosecutor has filed reply to the application for suspension of sentences which indicates that the appellant has remained behind the bars for a period of nearly six years and eight months including remission and does not have any criminal antecedents. 3. The appellant has been convicted and sentenced for the alleged murder of his mother Smt. Kanku. Shri Jain submits that there is no eyewitness of the incident. The prosecution has not disputed the fact that the appellant had no motive whatsoever for murdering his own mother. Shri Jain further submits that in the FIR (Ex.P/1) lodged by Bhanji, father of the appellant, it is clearly indicated that the appellant had gone to the village and was not in the house. Jaya, niece of first informant gave him information regarding some untoward incident having happened on which, he reached there and saw that his wife Smt. Kanku had been murdered by slitting her throat with a sharp weapon. Shri Jain submits that the appellant was arrested without there being any evidence to connect him with the alleged crime. The only piece of evidence on the basis whereof, the appellant has been convicted is the recovery of the knife and the blood stained clothes, on which, blood stains were noticed. The presence of blood on the clothes of the accused is explainable because after receiving the information regarding the incident, the appellant rushed home and he himself tried to check his mother on which, the blood stains could have been received. Regarding the recovery of knife, Shri Jain urged that the same is fabricated. The motbir witnesses Valji (PW.6) and Hakarji (PW.7) did not state that the knife was recovered at the instance of the accused appellant. He thus, urged that the appellant has remained in custody for the last nearly six years and eight months including remission and has available to him strong and plausible grounds for assailing the impugned judgment. Hearing of the appeal is likely to consume time. He thus, urged that the appellant has remained in custody for the last nearly six years and eight months including remission and has available to him strong and plausible grounds for assailing the impugned judgment. Hearing of the appeal is likely to consume time. With these submissions, Shri Jain implored the Court to accept the instant application for suspension of sentences and direct enlargement of the appellant on bail during pendency of the appeal. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's counsel. However, he too does not dispute the fact that the prosecution did not lead any plausible evidence to show that the appellant had any plausible motive whatsoever to murder his own mother. The Panch witnesses associated in the recoveries did not support the prosecution case and were declared hostile. Whether or not the sole circumstance of recovery of blood stained clothes and weapon would constitute such evidence so as to affirm the conviction of the accused as recorded by the trial court would be for this Court to examine when the appeal is finally decided. In any event, at this stage, we are duly satisfied when the appellant has available to him strong and plausible grounds for assailing the impugned judgment of conviction. Hearing of the appeal is unlikely in near future. The appellant has remained in custody for a period of nearly six years and eight months including remission. 5. 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 learned addl. Sessions Judge, Sagwada District Dungarpur vide judgment dated 29.11.2018 in Sessions Case No.09/2017 against the appellant-applicant Naresh S/o Shri Bhanji shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail subject to the condition that he shall furnish 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 06.06.2022 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 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. 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. 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.