Bhawani Singh vs State Of Rajasthan

The appellant has preferred this second application for suspension of sentence application under Section 389 Cr.P.C.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the trial court has convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC. It is further submitted that from the court statement of eye witnesses namely Maan Singh, Dara Singh and Shiv Singh, it is clear that all the accused persons had inflicted blows on the body of deceased Bhanwar Singh. It is also submitted that though some of the eye witnesses have deposed before the trial court that the first blow was inflicted by the appellant but it is not certain that the same was fatal and due to which the death occurred. Learned counsel has further submitted that the appellant is in judicial custody since December, 2010 and till date he has served out more than 12 years’ of sentence. It is also submitted that there is every likelihood that hearing of the appeal preferred by the appellant will take time.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the second application for suspension of sentence and submitted that the above-named eye witnesses have specifically stated that the appellant had inflicted lathi blow on the body of the deceased along with the other accused persons. It is further submitted that the said blow was fatal and on account of which the death occurred.

Having considered the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into consideration the custody period of petitioner which is more than 12 years, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the substantive sentence awarded to the accused appellant.

Accordingly, this second application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaur in Sessions Case No.53/2011 against the appellant - Bhawani Singh S/o Sampat Singh shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal 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 22.08.2022 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

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.

Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

Appellant(s) shall deposit the fine amount as imposed by the learned trial Court.

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.