Dhanpal @ Dhaniya vs State

The appellant-applicant Dhanpal @ Dhaniya S/o Unkar Maida has been convicted for the offence under section 302/34 IPC vide the judgment dated 03.09.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banswara in Sessions Case No.26/2016 and sentenced to under go life imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo six months' simple imprisonment. He has preferred the instant application under Section 389 CrPC seeking suspension of sentence awarded to him by the trial court during pendency of the appeal.

Learned Public Prosecutor has chosen not to file reply to the application for suspension of sentence and proposed to argue the matter orally. He has submitted the criminal antecedent report of the appellant-applicant, as per which he has been found involved in eight cases, including the present one. However, seven of these cases were registered between the years 2000 and 2008.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

On going through the impugned judgment and the record, it is apparent that as per the allegations levelled in the FIR (Ex.P/1), the case set up was that the appellant-applicant and the co-accused Kanti challenged the deceased Eilash in the night of 26.03.2016 and hurled abuses at him. The appellant-applicant allegedly caught hold of Eilash, whereafter Kanti stabbed him on the abdomen by a sword. While deposing in the court, all the three eye-witnesses, i.e. Kasna (P.W.1), Shambhooda (P.W.2) and Ratni (P.W.3), alleged that Dhaniya pushed Eilash, who fell down and thereafter Kanti stabbed him on the abdomen. The appellant- applicant was also examined for his injuries and his Medico Legal Report was exhibited as Ex.P/31, as per which, he was found having 8 blunt weapon injuries on his body, all of which are of significant dimensions. The prosecution has offered no explanation regarding the injuries suffered by the accused in the same incident.

In this view of the matter and considering the fact that the allegation of stabbing the deceased by the sword is specifically attributed to the co-accused Kanti, we are inclined to extend indulgence of bail to the appellant-applicant during the pendency of the bail.

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 Additional Sessions Judge, Banswara vide judgment dated 03.09.2019 in Sessions Case No.26/2016 against the appellant-applicant Dhanpal @ Dhaniya S/o Unkar Maida 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 07.09.2020 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

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

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.

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

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 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.