Lalu vs State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned judgment as well as record.

The appellant-applicant herein stands convicted for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 201 IPC vide judgment dated 10.05.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Caes, Udaipur in Sessions Case No.10/2019 (58/2017).

Shri Shamboo Singh Rathore, learned counsel representing the applicant-appellant urges that there is no evidence whatsoever on the record so as to connect the appellant with the charge of murdering the deceased Kalu. As per the highest prosecution case, the appellant, co-accused Kadwa and the deceased were seen consuming liquor near the liquor shop on 28.11.2015. The dead body alleged to be of Kalu was recovered from inside a well on 26.12.2015. The prosecution case is based purely on circumstantial evidence in the form of last seen. However, as per Shri Rathore, the evidence of sole witness of last seen namely Vallu Ram PW-7 is highly vacillating. The witness initially did not support the prosecution case and was declared hostile. Thereafter, when cross-examined by learned Public Prosecutor, he admitted to have given the police statement (Ex.P/11). However, when cross examined by the defence, the witness admitted that the sequence of events narrated by him in the police statement was told to him by certain people. There is no other evidence of incriminating recovery etc. so as to connect the appellant with the alleged crime. He further urges that appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty so granted to him and, therefore, the sentences awarded by the trial court to the appellant-applicant deserves to be suspended during pendency of appeal.

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by appellant's counsel. However, he too, is not in a position to dispute the fact that FIR (Ex.P/1) came to be lodged after almost one month of the deceased Kalu going missing. The name of the witness Valla Ram PW-7, who claims to have lastly seen deceased with the accused was not mentioned even in this belated report. Admittedly, the witness was declared hostile while deposing in his examination-in-chief and thereafter, he has given contradictory statement when cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor and learned defence counsel. There is no other evidence to connect the appellant with the crime.

In this background and having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances as available on record, I am of the opinion that the instant one is a fit case to enlarge the appellant-applicant on bail by suspending the sentences awarded to him.

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 Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Udaipur vide judgment dated 10.05.2019 in Sessions Case No.10/2019 (58/2017) against the appellant- applicant Lalu S/o Punjani Gameti 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 27.02.2020 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.