Karan Singh @ Kishan vs State Of Rajasthan

Learned Public Prosecutor has chosen not to file reply to the application for suspension of sentence and urges that he would argue the matter orally.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicant and learned Public Prosecutor on the application for suspension of sentence. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that the application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the co- accused Liladhar @ Amit and Vikram Singh has been allowed by the coordinate Bench of Court vide order dated 22.10.2018 by observing as below:

"Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the allegations on the face of it are false. The appellants have been enroped falsely. As per the allegation, the accused came to rescue Umed Singh who had been arrested by the Police. They were armed with weapon seems to have been used and only Chili Powder was used. Surprisingly, Umed Singh was got rescued and there was not even a single round of fire at the behest of the Police. Umed Singh was also arrested on the same day. No injury has been caused to the police party in the entire incident.

The appeal is not likely to be heard in near future.

Having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, without making any observation on the merits of the case, we are inclined to suspend the sentence of the applicants."

Thereafter application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the applicant Dharamvir has also been accepted vide order dated 02.11.2018. Therefore, he prays that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the appeal.

Learned Public prosecutor is not in a position to dispute the fact that the case of the present appellant stands on better footing than that of co-accused Dharamvir.

We have given our thoughtful consideration at the arguments advanced and perused the record.

In this background and upon consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant-applicant and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the application filed on behalf of the present applicant Karan Singh also deserves acceptance.

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 Bhadra, District Hanumangarh vide judgment dated 04.07.2017 in Sessions Case No.26/2011(CIS No.46/14) against the appellant-applicant Karan Singh @ Kishan S/o Sh. Rajendra Singh 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.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- (out of which one surety will be local surety) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 21.01.2019 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, 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 applicant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.