Jasram vs State

Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentence.

Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicant. It is submitted that wife of the appellant-applicant expired by burn injury in her matrimonial home on 29.06.2016. It is submitted that appellant-applicant’s wife was suffering from psychiatric issues long before her death and was under treatment. It is further submitted that Dr. Sukhveer Singh (PW-8), in his evidence, has also verified the said fact that the deceased was suffering from psychiatric issues and was under treatment. It is also submitted that taking into consideration the above fact; the evidence of Dr. Sukhveer Singh (PW-8) as well as taking into consideration the contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses Dayaram (PW-1) father of the deceased, Raghuveer (PW-2) her brother and Kalawati (PW-3) her mother, this Court has suspended sentence of co-accused Peerdutt, who happened to be the Jeth (brother-in-law of the deceased). Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has, therefore, prayed that in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant by the trial court may be also suspended.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence and argued that the appellant-applicant is husband of the deceased and the deceased expired within seven years of marriage, therefore, his sentence is not liable to be suspended.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties; after carefully scrutinizing the record of the case and taking into consideration the fact that co-accused Peerdutt, whose sentence has already been suspended by this Court, we deem it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant.

Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence application filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh vide judgment dated 05.04.2022 in Sessions Case No.85/2016 against appellant-applicant Jasram S/o Sahabram 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 12.12.2022 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 appellant 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, 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-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-appellant 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.