Parvati Kanwar vs State

The instant application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 CrPC has been preferred by the appellant- applicant Smt. Parvati Kanwar W/o Jeewan Singh, who have been convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment vide the judgment dated 23.01.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ratangarh, District Churu in Sessions Case No.5/2014.

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

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

Mr. Suresh Kumbhat, learned counsel representing the appellant-applicant, urged that the appellant-applicant is a lady aged 85 years. She has remained in custody for nearly 7 years. The entire prosecution case hinges around the testimony of the star witnesses Suraj (P.W.1) and Khushi (P.W.2), the children of the deceased Smt. Shubh Rathore. Both the witnesses alleged in their testimony that the appellant herein, being the mother-in-law and Kuldeep Singh, being their father and husband of the deceased, assaulted her by an axe and killed her. Mr. Kumbhat pointed out that Kuldeep Singh has not even been charge-sheeted for the offence under Section 302 IPC. Even at the time of the incident, the appellant was an old lady aged about 73 years and thus, her physical condition was not such that she could have single-handedly killed Smt. Shubh Rathore, who was a well-built lady. He, therefore, urges that the appellant, who is in twilight of her life, deserves indulgence of bail during the pendency of the appeal.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant- applicant's counsel. However, he too is not a position to dispute the fact that the star prosecution witnesses Suraj (P.W.1), being the son of the deceased Smt. Shubh Rathore, clearly alleged that his father Kuldeep Singh and his grand-mother Smt. Parvati Kanwar were assaulting his mother by an axe. The other star witness Khushi (P.W.2) also stated in her sworn testimony that her mother was murdered by her father and her grand-mother. However, as has been noted above, Kuldeep Singh was not even charge-sheeted for the offence under Section 302 IPC.

True it is that the Investigating Officer claims to have recovered the blood-stained axe at the instance of the accused- appellant, but whether or not the said evidence of recovery would stand to scrutiny, if the statements of the eye-witnesses are discarded, would be gone into when the appeal is finally heard. On going through the statement of the accused under Section 313 CrPC, it is revealed that she gave out her age to be 86 years, whereas the trial court estimated it to be 87 years. Manifestly, thus, the appellant-applicant is a very old woman. She has already been incarcerated in prison for the last nearly 7 years. Hearing of the appeal is unlikely in near future. We are prima facie satisfied that the appellant-applicant has available to her strong grounds so as to assail the impugned judgment of conviction.

In this background and having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances available on record, we deem it to be a fit case for suspending the sentences awarded to the appellant- applicant during pendency of the appeal.

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, Ratangarh, District Churu vide judgment dated 23.01.2020 in Sessions Case No.5/2014 against the appellant-applicant Parvati Kanwar wife of late Jeewan Singh shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and she shall be released on bail, provided she 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 her appearance in this court on 24.08.2020 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

That she 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, she will give in writing her 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.